Search

Rösler, Herbert, Grismer, L. Lee, Ineich, Ivan, Kaiser, Hinrich (2019): The purportedly Indo-Australian gecko species Cnemaspis timoriensis (Duméril & Bibron, 1836) is actually the first named species of the neotropical genus Gonatodes Fitzinger, 1843 (Squamata: Gekkonidae). Zootaxa 4576 (3): 483-509, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4576.3.4

Gymnodactylus timoriensis Dum��ril & Bibron, 1836 is an older synonym of Gonatodes humeralis (Guichenot, 1855) Fran��ois Louis Nompar de Caumont La Force, Comte de Castelnau (1810���1880) was a French naturalist, who collected several geckos during his journey to South America in 1843���47 (Castelnau 1850). Dum��ril & Dum��ril (1851) considered these specimens, from the Mission de Sarayacu on the Rio Ucayali in Peru, as members of their species ���G. de Gaudichaud. Gaudichaudii Dum. Bib.��� (= Garthia gaudichaudii), but they described some differences in pholidosis and color pattern. Guichenot (1855) recognized that these differences should not be attributed to members of the same species but provided evidence that they represented a distinct species, which he described and illustrated as Gymnodactylus humeralis Guichenot, 1855 (= Gonatodes humeralis) in detail (see also the descriptions of synonyms of G. humeralis, including Gymnodactylus incertus Peters 1871:397, Goniodactylus sulcatus O���Shaugnessy 1875:265, and Gonatodes ferrugineus Cope 1864:102). Under consideration of observed intraspecific variation, the holotype of Gymnodactylus timoriensis conforms in all meristic characters as well as in the morphological and numerical aspects of scale characters to those of Gonatodes humeralis described in the literature. The one recognizable exception is the absence of a single, enlarged scale in the posterior part of the supraciliary flap, but this appears to be a variable character: similarly expanded ciliary scales near the end of the supraciliary flap were also missing in one of nine specimens from Surinam and Venezuela we examined. Like other specimens of G. humeralis, MNHN 0 810 possesses a short nasofrenal stripe, two postocular stripes that begin immediately on the posterior edge of the eye, and flecks in the shoulder area. Additional common elements of the color pattern include a relatively broad, light, unicolored vertebral stripe whose edge is produced by asymmetrical flecks, and laterally two linearly arranged rows of flecks and short stripes, where the upper row appears larger and darker than the lower row (see the descriptions and illustrations in Guichenot 1855; Mertens 1972; Hoogmoed 1973; Boos 1984; Hoogmoed & Avila-Pires 1991; Avila-Pires 1995; Lehr 2002; Cole & Kok 2006; Bernarde et al. 2011; Cole et al. 2013; Prudente et al. 2013; Morato et al. 2014; Roberto et al. 2014; Silva et al. 2016; Se��aris et al. 2018). Ultimately, we can only speculate about the exact collection locality of the holotype of Gymnodactylus timoriensis. Whereas Gonatodes humeralis does occur in Brazil, it does not occur as far south as Rio de Janeiro or even in a region close to this prominent stop in Gaudichaud���s travels (Vanzolini 1968a, b; Avila-Pires 1995; Ribeiro-J��nior & Amaral 2016: Fig. 92), and we therefore question whether Gaudichaud himself could have collected it (see above). However, in the first three volumes of their Erp��tologie G��n��rale, Dum��ril & Bibron (1834, 1835, 1836) cited a variety of herpetological collectors and donors as suppliers of specimens from South America and several Caribbean islands. Shipments from French Guiana, for example, are mentioned as having been sent by several named persons and, we think it is likely that MNHN 0 810 may have been sent to Rio de Janeiro in a similar shipment���some of which were shipped contemporaneously with Gaudichaud���s visits to South America. Based on the unpublished MNHN catalog for the period from 1832���1838, only two large South American collections were received, one from Gaudichaud and the other from the naturalist Alcide d���Orbigny (1802���1857), who detailed his collecting effort in the nine-volume compendium Voyage dans l���Am��rique M��ridionale (Orbigny 1835���44). Before 1832 there was no formal cataloging system in Paris and the earliest specimens accessioned into the herpetological collection are therefore untraceable. Nevertheless, with Gaudichaud listed as the collector, the most reasonable approach is to credit him for the delivery in which MNHN 0 810 arrived in Paris., Published as part of R��sler, Herbert, Grismer, L. Lee, Ineich, Ivan & Kaiser, Hinrich, 2019, The purportedly Indo-Australian gecko species Cnemaspis timoriensis (Dum��ril & Bibron, 1836) is actually the first named species of the neotropical genus Gonatodes Fitzinger, 1843 (Squamata: Gekkonidae), pp. 483-509 in Zootaxa 4576 (3) on pages 499-500, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4576.3.4, http://zenodo.org/record/3715752, {"references":["Dumeril, A. M. C. & Bibron, G. (1836) Erpetologie Generale ou Histoire Naturelle Complete des Reptiles. Tome Troisieme. Contenant l'Histoire de Toutes les Especes des Quatre Premieres Familles de l'Ordre des Lezards ou Sauriens, Savoir: les Crocodiles, les Cameleons, les Geckos et les Varans. Librairie Encyclopedique de Roret, Paris, France, 517 pp.","Guichenot, A. (1855) Animaux Nouveaux ou Rares Recueillis Pendant l'Expedition dans les Parties Centrales de l'Amerique du Sud, de Rio de Janeiro Lima, et de Lima au Para; Executee par Ordre du Gouvernement Francais Pendant les Annees 1843 a 1847, sous la Direction du Comte Francis de Castelnau. Volume 2. Reptiles. P. Bertrand, Paris, France, 95 pp.","Castelnau, F. L. N. de (1850) Expedition dans les Parties Centrales de l'Amerique du Sud, de Rio de Janeiro Lima et de Lima au Para, executee par Ordre du Gouvernement Francais pendant les Annees 1843 a 1847 sous la Direction de Francis de Castelnau. Jean-Jacques Champin, Paris, France, 103 pp.","Dumeril, A. M. C. & Dumeril, A. H. A. (1851) Catalogue Methodique de la Collection des Reptiles. Gide et Baudry, Paris, France, 224 pp.","Peters, W. C. H. (1871) Uber eine von Hrn Dr. Robert Abendroth in dem Hochlande von Peru gemachte Sammlung von Amphibien, welche derselbe dem konigl. zoologischen Museum geschenkt hat. Monatsberichte der Koniglich Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin, 1871 (August), 397 - 404.","Cope, E. D. (1864) [1863] Description of new American Squamata, in the Museum of the Smithsonian Institute, Washington. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, 1863, 100 - 106.","Mertens, R. (1972) Herpetofauna tobagana. Stuttgarter Beitrage zur Naturkunde, Serie A, 252, 1 - 22.","Hoogmoed, M. S. (1973) Notes on the herpetofauna of Surinam. IV. The lizards and amphisbaenians of Surinam. Biogeographica, 4, 1 - 419.","Boos, H. E. A. (1984) The terrestrial reptiles of Monos Island. Living World, Journal of the Trinidad and Tobago Field Naturalists' Club, 1983 - 1984, 14 - 18.","Hoogmoed, M. S. & Avila-Pires, T. C. S. (1991) Annotated checklist of the herpetofauna of Petit Saut, Sinnamary River, French Guiana. Zoologische Mededelingen, 65, 53 - 88.","Avila-Pires, T. C. S. (1995) Lizards of Brazilian Amazonia (Reptilia: Squamata). Zoologische Verhandelingen, 299, 1 - 706.","Lehr, E. (2002) Amphibien und Reptilien in Peru. Natur und Tier-Verlag, Munster, Germany, 208 pp.","Cole, C. J. & Kok, P. J. R. (2006) A new species of gekkonid lizard (Sphaerodactylinae: Gonatodes) from Guyana, South America. American Museum Novitates, 3524, 1 - 13. https: // doi. org / 10.1206 / 0003 - 0082 (2006) 3524 [1: ANSOGL] 2.0. CO; 2","Bernarde, P. S., Machado, R. A. & Turci, L. C. B. (2011) Herpetofauna da area do Igarap Esperanca na Reserva Extrativista Riozinho da Liberdade, Acre, Brasil. Biota Neotropica, 11 (3), 117 - 144. https: // doi. org / 10.1590 / S 1676 - 06032011000300010","Cole, C. J., Townsend, C. R., Reynolds, R. P., MacCulloch, R. D. & Lathrop, A. (2013) Amphibians and reptiles of Guyana, South America: illustrated keys, annotated species accounts, and a biogeographic synopsis. Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington, 125, 317 - 578.","Prudente, A. L. C., Magalhaes, F., Menks, A. & de Melo Sarmento, J. F. (2013) Checklist of lizards of the Juruti, state of Para, Brazil. Check List, 9, 42 - 50. https: // doi. org / 10.15560 / 9.1.42","Morato, S. A. A., Calixto, P. O., Mendes, L. R., Gomes, R., Galatti, U., Trein, F. L., Oliveira, F. S. & Ferreira, G. N. (2014) Guia Fotografico de Identificacao da Herpetofauna da Floresta Nacional de Sarac-Taquera, Estado do Par. STCP Engenharia de Projetos Ltda., Curitiba, Brazil, 213 pp.","Roberto, I. J., Pinto, T., Schlickmann, A. & Fraga, A. (2014) From Amazonia to the semi-arid: the unexpected record of Gonatodes humeralis (Squamata: Sphaerodactylidae) for the Caatinga Biome. Herpetology Notes, 7, 309 - 311.","Silva, M. B. da, Rocha, W. A. da & Nogueira-Paranhos, J. D. (2016) Checklist of reptiles of the Amazonia-Caatinga-Cerrado ecotonal zone in eastern Maranhao, Brazil. Herpetology Notes, 9, 7 - 14.","Senaris, J. C., Aristeguieta Padron, M. M., Rojas Gil, H. & Rojas-Runjaic, F. J. M. (2018) Guia Ilustrada de los Anfibios y Reptiles del Valle de Caracas, Venezuela. Ediciones IVIC, Caracas, Venezuela, 347 pp.","Vanzolini, P. E. (1968 a) Lagartos brasileiros da familia Gekkonidae (Sauria). Arquivos de Zoologia, Sao Paulo, 17 (1), 1 - 84. https: // doi. org / 10.11606 / issn. 2176 - 7793. v 17 i 1 p 1 - 84","Vanzolini, P. E. (1968 b) Geography of the South American Gekkonidae (Sauria). Arquivos de Zoologia, Sao Paulo, 17 (1), 85 - 112. https: // doi. org / 10.11606 / issn. 2176 - 7793. v 17 i 2 p 85 - 112","Ribeiro-Junior, M. & Amaral, S. (2016) Diversity, distribution, and conservation of lizards (Reptilia: Squamata) in the Brazilian Amazonia. Neotropical Biodiversity, 2 (1), 195 - 421. https: // doi. org / 10.1080 / 23766808.2016.1236769","Dumeril, A. M. C. & Bibron, G. (1834) Erpetologie Generale ou Histoire Naturelle Complete des Reptiles. Tome Premier. Contenant les Generalites de l'Histoire des Reptiles et Celles de l'Ordre des Cheloniens ou des Tortues. Librairie Encyclopedique de Roret, Paris, France, 447 pp.","Dumeril, A. M. C. & Bibron, G. (1835) Erpetologie Generale ou Histoire Naturelle Complete des Reptiles. Tome Second. Contenant l'Histoire de Toutes les Especes de l'Ordre des Tortues ou Cheloniens, et les Generalites de Celui des Lezards ou Sauriens. Librairie Encyclopedique de Roret, Paris, France, 680 pp.","Orbigny, A. d' (1835 - 1844) Voyage dans l'Amerique Meridionale (le Bresil, la Republique Orientale de l'Uruguay, la Republique Argentine, la Patagonie, la Republique du Chili, la Republique de Bolivie, la Republique du Perou), Execute Pendant les Annees 1826, 1827, 1828, 1829, 1830, 1831, 1832 et 1833. Librairie de la Societe Geologique de France, Paris, France."]}

The day geckos of the genus Phelsuma have their center of diversity in Madagascar and the adjacent archipelagos in the western Indian Ocean, especially the Mascarenes, Comoros and Seychelles. Their brilliant colours, diurnal activity, and interesting behaviours have resulted in a long lasting high demand for the pet trade. Accordingly, the international trade of all Phelsuma species is regulated by the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Floras (CITES) where all species are included in CITES appendix II. In order to facilitate operating and control of these regulations by national and international nature conservation authorities we provide an updated taxonomic checklist for all species and subspecies of the genus Phelsuma and for Rhoptropella ocellata (a taxon resurrected from the synonymy of Phelsuma). Since a few species (especially P. dubia, P. grandis and P. laticauda) have become invasive across different countries and political territories, updated distributional data is also provided. Although a substantial number of the currently accepted taxa is well defined, the taxonomy of several species and subspecies is in need of revision and taxonomic changes are expected in future. We designate Phelsuma ornatum Gray, 1825 as type species of the genus Colobopus Fitzinger, 1843 in order to allow an unambiguous interpretation of this genus name.

The present study focuses on morphological variation among conspicuous geographic colour morphs of Gekko vittatus (sensu lato). Meristic data revealed four distinct, allopatric groups of phenotypes, whereas the morphometric characters examined do not differ among colour morphs. One of these, endemic to the Palau Islands in the Pacific, is also genetically distinct and is here described as a new species.

Gekko vittatus group (Figure 7) Species. G. vittatus Houttuyn, 1782 (Figure 7 A���B); Gekko sp. ��� Belau ���; Gekko sp. ���Malaupaina.��� Characters. Maximum SVL 140.0 mm; nares in contact with rostral; nasals 3���4; postmentals relatively small; dorsal tubercle rows 12���14; precloacal pores 14���58; postcloacal tubercles 1���3; no webbing between fingers and toes; fore and hind limbs with tubercles; lateral folds with tubercles; subcaudals not enlarged; head unicolored, without pattern; nominate form with white, anteriorly bifurcated dorsal stripe. Distribution. G. vittatus is known from Indonesia (from Java to New Guinea), Papua New Guinea, the Solomon Islands and northern Vanuatu (Torres and Banks Islands, Malakula Island); Gekko sp.��� Belau ��� is currently recorded from the Republic of Palau; Gekko sp. ���Malaupaina��� is currently reported from Malaupaina Island (Olu Malau Islands), Solomons (Crombie & Pregill 1999; McCoy 2006). Remarks. Gekko vittatus was described by Houttuyn (1782) with the locality data ���zekerlyk uit de India.��� Fitzinger (1826) referred the species to the genus Platydactylus Goldfuss, 1820 (see also Schlegel 1827; Wagler 1830; Dum��ril & Bibron 1836), which was subsequently split into three subgenera by Fitzinger (1843), of which vittatus belonged to his new subgenus Scelotretus. Lacerta unistriata, which was described by Shaw (1792), proved to be a synonym of G. vittatus (e.g., Daudin 1802; Gray 1845; Boulenger 1885; Wermuth 1965; Bauer 1994; Kluge 2001). Likewise Platydactylus bivittatus, which was described by Dum��ril & Bibron (1836) from New Guinea and Waigeo Island, Indonesia, was synonymized with G. vittatus (Loveridge 1948). Fitzinger���s (1843) Platydactylus (Scelotretus) bivittatus and Boulenger���s (1885) Gecko vittatus var. bivittatus referred to the same taxon. Gecko trachylaemus, described by Peters (1873), was also synonymized with G. vittatus (Peters & Doria 1878). The number of preanofemoral pores recorded in G. vittatus varies considerably according to different authors (Boulenger 1885: 50���59, De Rooij 1915: 14���58, Loveridge 1948: 21���57). Such variation of preanofemoral pores has not been described for any other Gekko species and likely points to the existence of cryptic species. However, in the series of G. vittatus from New Guinea and Ambon Island which was studied by us, we could not find any significant differences (see Table 1). With respect to pattern, we observed only slight variation in the number of light tail bands (4���6) and in the shape of the vertebral stripe on the tail and its bifurcation in the shoulder region (bifurcated branches may reach only as far as the back of head or may reach the eyes). Gekko sp. ���Malaupaina��� is known from the eastern Solomons (e.g., Malaupaina Island). This form differs from G. vittatus s. str. in the coloration of the iris (gray versus light brown), ground coloration (black olive versus brown olive) and in pattern (light vertebral stripe that bifurcates on the neck lacking in G. v i t t a t u s s. str.), see McCoy (1980: Pl. 2, fig. D, Pl. 6, fg. A) and McCoy (2006: Pl. 15). Mertens (1934: plate 2, fig. 7) pointed to a similarly patternless G. vittatus s. lat. from Nissan Atoll (Green Island Group, Papua New Guinea). The taxonomy of the southern Malaupaina form clearly deserves further research. Gekko vittatus from the Belau Islands (Republic of Palau) was mentioned as a distinct species by Crombie & Pregill (1999), however, it remains undescribed. The obscurely striped Gekko sp. ��� Belau ��� was occasionally referred to Gecko vittatus bivittatus (e.g., Boulenger 1885; Dryden & Taylor 1969), but Crombie & Pregill (1999) refer to significant differences between Gekko sp. ��� Belau ��� and the unstriped Gekko vittatus from New Guinea and the Solomons. The Belau form of G. vittatus shows some genetic divergence from G. vittatus across the remainder of the range (see above). The G. vittatus of Vanuatu shares its greatest molecular affinity with the form from the southern Solomons (see Figure 1)., Published as part of R��sler, Herbert, Bauer, Aaron M., Heinicke, Matthew P., Greenbaum, Eli, Jackman, Todd, Nguyen, Truong Quang & Ziegler, Thomas, 2011, Phylogeny, taxonomy, and zoogeography of the genus Gekko Laurenti, 1768 with the revalidation of G. reevesii Gray, 1831 (Sauria: Gekkonidae), pp. 1-50 in Zootaxa 2989 on pages 19-21, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.278393, {"references":["Houttuyn, M. (1782) Het onderschied der salamanderen van de haagdissen in ' t algemeen, en van de gekkos in ' t byz'onder, aangetood. Verhandelingen Uitgegeven door het Genootschap der Wetenschappen te Vlissingen, 9, 305 - 336, 1 pl.","Crombie, R. I. & Pregill, G. K. (1999) A checklist of the herpetofauna of the Palau Islands (Republic of Belau), Oceania. Herpetological Monographs, 13, 29 - 80.","McCoy, M. (2006) Reptiles of the Solomon Islands. Pensoft Publishers, Sofia, 147 pp.","Fitzinger, L. I. (1826) Neue Classification der Reptilien nach ihren naturlichen Verwandtschaften. Ver l ag J. G. He ub ner, Wi en, 66 pp.","Schlegel, H. (1827) Herpetologische Nachrichten. Isis von Oken, 20, columns 281 - 294.","Wagler, J. G. (1830) Naturliches System der Amphibien mit vorangegangener Classification der Saugethiere und Vogel. J. G. Cotta´sche Buchhandlung, Munchen, vi + 354 pp., 2 pls.","Dumeril, A. M. C. & Bibron, G. (1836) Erpetologie Generale ou Histoire Naturelle Complete des Reptiles. Paris (Roret), 3, iv + 517 pp, errata, 2 folding tables, pls. 25 - 28, 33, 35, 43 - 48.","Fitzinger, L. I. (1843) Systema reptilium. Amblyglossae. Braumuller & Seidel, Vindobonae, 106 pp.","Shaw, G. (1792) The single-striped lizard. Naturalist's Miscellany, Vol. 3, Nodder & Co., London, 2 pp., pl. 89.","Daudin, F. M. (1802) Histoire Naturelle, Generale et Particuliere des Reptiles. Vol. 4. F. Dufart, Paris, 397 pp, 13 pls.","Gray, J. E. (1845) Catalogue of the Specimens of the Lizards in the Collection of the British Museum. British Museum, London, xxiii + 289 pp.","Boulenger, J. A. (1885) Catalogue of the lizards in the British Museum (Natural History). I. Geckonidae, Eublepharidae, Uroplatidae, Pygopodidae, Agamidae. British Museum (Natural History), London, xii + 436 pp., 32 pls.","Wermuth, H. (1965) Liste der rezenten Amphibien und Reptilien. Gekkonidae, Pygopodidae, Xantusiidae. Das Tierreich, 80, Walterv de Gruyter, Berlin, XXII + 246 pp.","Bauer, A. M. (1994) Gekkonidae (Reptilia, Sauria), Part I Australia and Oceania. Das Tierreich 109 (Part). Walter de Gruyter, Berlin, XII + 306 pp.","Kluge, A. G. (2001) Gekkotan lizard taxonomy. Hamadryad, 26, 1 - 209.","Loveridge, A. (1948) New Guinean reptiles and amphibians in the Museum of Comparative Zoology and United States National Museum. Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology, 101, 305 - 430.","Peters, W. C. H. (1873) Uber eine, zwei neue Gattungen enthaltende, Sammlung von Batrachiern des Hrn. Dr. O. Wucherer aus Bahia, so wie uber einige neue oder weniger bekannte Saurier. 2. Uber neue oder wenig bekannte Sauria. Monatsberichte der koniglich Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin, 1872, 774 - 776.","Peters, W. C. H. & Doria, G. (1878) Catalogo dei rettili e dei batraci raccolti da O. Beccari, L. M. D'Albertis e A. A. Bruijn nella Sotto-Regione Austro-Malese. Annali del Museo Civico di Storia Naturale di Genova, 13, 323 - 450, pls. I - VII.","De Rooij, N. (1915) The Reptiles of the Indo-Australian Archipelago. I. Lacertilia, Chelonia, Emydosauria. E. J. Brill Ltd., Leiden, xiv + 384 pp.","McCoy, M. (1980) Reptiles of the Solomon Islands. Handbook No. 7, Wau Ecology Institute, Wau, Papua New Guinea, 80 pp.","Mertens, R. (1934) Die Inselreptilien, ihre Ausbreitung, Variation und Artbildung. Zoologica, 32, 1 - 209.","Dryden, G. L. & Taylor, E. H. (1969) Reptiles from the Mariana and Caroline Islands. University of Kansas Science Bulletin, 48, 269 - 279."]}

Gekko japonicus group (Figures 4, 5A) Species. G. auriverrucosus Zhou & Liu 1982; G. canhi R��sler, Nguyen, Doan, Ho & Ziegler 2010; G. chinensis Gray, 1842; G. hokouensis Pope, 1928 (Figure 4 B); G. japonicus (Schlegel, 1836) (Figure 4 A); G. l i b o e n s i s Zaho & Li, 1982; G. melli Vogt, 1922; G. palmatus Boulenger, 1907 (Figure 4 C); G. scabridus Liu & Zhou, 1982; G. s c i e n - tiadventura R��sler, Ziegler, Vu, Herrmann & B��hme, 2004 (Figure 4 D); G. shibatai Toda, Sengoku, Hikida & Ota, 2008; G. similignum Smith, 1923; G. subpalmatus G��nther, 1864; G. swinhonis G��nther, 1864; G. taibaiensis Song, 1985; G. t a w a e n s i s Okada, 1956; G. vertebralis Toda, Sengoku, Hikida & Ota, 2008 (Figure 5 A); G. wenxianensis Zhou & Wang, 2008; G. yakuensis Matsui & Okada, 1968. Characters. 58.9���99.2 mm SVL; nares in contact with rostral (except for G. auriverrucosus); nasals 3 (rarely 2 in G. c h i n e n s i s); postmentals relatively small (e.g., G. similignum), largest in G. c a n h i, G. c h i n e n s i s, G. palmatus, G. scientiadventura; 0���21 dorsal tubercle rows; 0���32 precloacal pores; postcloacal tubercles 1���4; webbing between fingers and toes weakly developed to extensive (G. chinensis, G. m e l l i, G. palmatus, G. scientiadventura, G. similignum, G. subpalmatus); tubercles present on fore and hind limbs, hind limbs only, or lacking all together; lateral fold without tubercles; subcaudals enlarged, in a longitudinal row (in G. yakuensis medially subdivided); head pattern present or not, without figure-shape (UU- to W-shaped in G. m e l l i and W-shaped in G. scientiadventura); vertebral region with relatively large, light flecks, blotches or bands. Distribution. China, Japan, Korea, Taiwan, and Vietnam including offshore islands; possibly Laos (Figure 3 A). Remarks. The Gekko japonicus group is very complex. Different morphological features of the species of this group (e. g., nares in contact with rostral or not, broad webbing between fingers and toes or not, dorsal tubercles absent or present, tubercles on limbs absent or present, see Table 2) demonstrate that this genetically well-defined clade is highly morphologically variable (see Figure 1). Numerous authors have listed Gekko chinensis as a representative of Vietnam���s herpetofauna (e.g., Bourret 1937 b, 1940 a, 1943; Zhao & Adler 1993; Welch 1994; Bobrov 1995 a; R��sler et al. 2005). According to Nguyen et al. (2005), G. chinensis is widely distributed in the north of the country, whereas G. palmatus is only recorded from the two northern provinces of Lang Son and Vinh Phuc (see also Nguyen & Ho 1996). However, according to Ziegler et al. (2006) and based on new locality records (see Appendix 1) the distribution of G. palmatus in Vietnam in fact extends from several northern provinces southward to central Vietnam in Quang Binh Province. Taking into account the records given for G. c h i n e n s i s by Nguyen & Ho (1996), the latter species must occur in sympatry with G. palmatus at least in the northern Vietnamese provinces of Bac Giang, Bac Kan, Cao Bang, Lang Son, Quang Ninh, and Vinh Phuc. However, all Gekko studied by us from these provinces proved to be G. palmatus and none had the diagnostic characters of G. c h i n e n s i s. This also makes the records of G. chinensis from Hai Duong and Ninh Binh provinces (see Nguyen & Ho 1996) questionable and they are probably based on misidentifications of G. palmatus. Bobrov & Semenov (2008) listed all previous identifications of G. chinensis from Vietnam as G. palmatus. Ota et al. (1995) believed G. c h i n e n s i s and G. palmatus to represent allopatric taxa (see also Matsui & Ota 1995). Concordant with the latter authors we herein suggest that the known occurrence of G. chinensis is limited to China (southern provinces of Fujian, Guangdong, Guangxi, Guizhou, Hong Kong, Sichuan, and Yunnan) whereas that of G. palmatus is only in northern and central Vietnam (Bac Giang, Bac Kan, Cao Bang, Hai Duong, Hai Phong, Lang Son, Ninh Binh, Quang Binh, Quang Ninh, and Vinh Phuc provinces). Further collections or study of museum specimens are needed to clarify the identification of populations along the China-Vietnam border and whether G. chinensis and G. palmatus occur in sympatry. The distinguishing character of broad toe webbing in G. palmatus versus a narrower webbing in G. c h i n e n s i s, which can regularly be found in the older literature (e.g., Boulenger 1907; Smith 1935; Bourret 1937 b), may have conspicuously added to the above listed confusion and misidentifications, because it represents an ambiguous diagnostic character (Ota et al. 1995). Smith (1935: 114) even concluded that G. palmatus is ���possibly a racial form of G. c h i n e n s i s.��� However, G. palmatus and G. chinensis can be easily distinguished by the size of the internasals compared to the nasorostrals (internasals same size or larger than nasorostrals in G. chinensis versus always smaller in G. palmatus) and statistically significant differences in the number of midbody scales and the number of lamellae on the first, third and fifth fingers as well as the first toe (Ota et al. 1995). A key character that allows for proper identification of both aforementioned species is the presence of limb tubercles. These are present in G. c h i n e n s i s, but are completely lacking in G. palmatus (our data). Ota et al. (1995) indicated shank tubercles for G. chinensis and the specimen depicted in Zhao & Adler (1993: pl. 21, fig. G.) has tubercles both on the fore and hind limbs; but the specimen of G. palmatus depicted by Nguyen et al. (2009: fig. 314) completely lacks such tubercles. The taxonomic history of G. similignum is controversial. The type locality of this taxon is Hainan Island (Smith 1923). Stejneger (1932) synonymized G. similignum with G. chinensis (see also Zhao et al. 1999). However, Ota et al. (1995) and Kluge (2001) listed it as valid at the specific rank. Gekko chinensis and G. smilignum differ in maximum SVL, in the number of scales around midbody and in the number of lamellae on the first and fourth toes (see Table 1). Gekko liboensis was described by Zhou & Li (1982) based on an adult female specimen collected in 1979. Three further specimens (two females and a juvenile) were collected in 1984 (Zhao et al. 1999). Zhao & Adler (1993) synonymized G. liboensis with G. hokouensis (see also G��nther 1994; Kluge 2001; Henkel & Schmidt 2003). In contrast, Kluge (1993), Bauer (1994), Welch (1994), Matsui & Ota (1995), Zhao et al. (1999), R��sler (2000), R��sler et al. (2005, 2006) treated G. liboensis as a valid species. Gekko liboensis differs from G. hokouensis by a larger SVL (85 versus 70 mm), absence of internasals, more interorbitals (40 versus 30���33), flat dorsal tubercles, fewer dorsal tubercle rows (10 versus 12���18) and by the number of lamellae below the fourth toe (9 versus 15���18). However, as adult males are still lacking for G. l i b o e n s i s, important diagnostic characters and possibly additional distinguishing features such as the number of precloacal pores are still missing. The nares of G. auriverrucosus are not in contact with the first supralabial (Zhou & Liu 1982), which seems to represent a derived character of the Gekko gecko group (except for G. verreauxi). Zhao & Adler (1993) synonymized G. scabridus with G. chinensis (see also Kluge 2001), but Matsui & Ota (1995) and Zhao et al. (1999) again evaluated the former taxon as valid species. Liu & Zhou (1982) pointed to the phenotypic similarity between G. scabridus and G. japonicus. According to Liu & Zhou (1982), G. scabridus differs from G. japonicus by having tubercles on its back and hind limbs and by a higher count of precloacal pores. From Table 1 it is obvious that there exist additional distinguishing features between the two species. Compared with G. japonicus, G. scabridus has fewer interorbitals (30 versus 32���35), fewer lamellae below the first toe (6���9 versus 10���12), and fourth toe (7���9 versus 14���16), more dorsal tubercle rows (17���21 versus 9���14) and a higher number of precloacal pores (10���15 versus 6���9). In comparsion to G. chinensis it has only slightly developed webbing between the fingers and toes, fewer precloacal pores, and more postcloacal tubercles. We, therefore, accept the specific status of G. scabridus and regard it as a valid member of the Gekko japonicus group. Vogt (1922) originally described G. m e l l i based on a large series of which now only two specimens still exist (Bauer & G��nther 1991). Stejneger (1932) listed G. m e l l i as a subspecies of G. subpalmatus and Pope (1935) finally synonymized the former species with G. subpalmatus. R��sler et al. (2005) revalidated G. melli as a distinct species (see also R��sler & Tiedemann 2007). With respect to G. subpalmatus it is interesting to note that the back of the holotype is slightly banded and that the vertebral region shows four indistinct light blotches (R��sler et al. 2005: figs. 11���12). However, the ground coloration of the live specimen depicted in Zhao & Adler (1993: their Pl. 32, fig. B) is blackish-olive (Black 3 U). This specimen, in addition, has a repeatedly interrupted orange (722 U) vertebral stripe and tail blotches of the same color; a banded pattern as observable from the holotype is not discernible (see also fig. in Huang & Zong 1998: pl. 29). Whether this reflects intraspecific variation or a persistent confusion over the identity of this species remains to be investigated., Published as part of R��sler, Herbert, Bauer, Aaron M., Heinicke, Matthew P., Greenbaum, Eli, Jackman, Todd, Nguyen, Truong Quang & Ziegler, Thomas, 2011, Phylogeny, taxonomy, and zoogeography of the genus Gekko Laurenti, 1768 with the revalidation of G. reevesii Gray, 1831 (Sauria: Gekkonidae), pp. 1-50 in Zootaxa 2989 on pages 13-17, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.278393, {"references":["Rosler, H., Nguyen, Q. T., Doan, V. K., Ho, T. C., Nguyen, T. T. & Ziegler, T. (2010) A new species of the genus Gekko Laurenti, 1768 (Squamata: Sauria: Gekkonidae) from Vietnam with remarks on G. japonicus (Schlegel, 1836). Zootaxa, 2329, 56 - 68.","Schlegel, H. (1836) Le Platydactyle Monarque. Platydactylus Monarchus. In: Dumeril, A. M. C. & Bibron, G. (1836), Erpetologie Generale ou Histoire Naturelle Complete des Reptiles. Vol. 3. Roret, Paris, pp. 335 - 336.","Vogt, T. (1922) Zur Reptilien- und Amphibienfauna Sudchinas. Archiv fur Naturgeschichte, 10, 135 - 146.","Boulenger, G. A. (1907) Description of new lizard in the British Museum. Annals and Magazine of Natural History, 19, 486 - 489.","Toda, M., Sengoku, S., Hikida, T. & Ota, H. (2008) Description of two new species of the genus Gekko (Squamata: Gekkonidae) from the Tokara and Amami Island Group in the Ryukyu Archipelago, Japan. Copeia, 2008, 452 - 466.","Smith, M. A. (1923) On a collection of reptiles and batrachians from the island of Hainan. Journal of the Natural History Society of Siam, 6, 195 - 212.","Gunther, A. (1864) The Reptiles of British India. The Ray Society London, xxvii + 452 pp., 26 pls.","Song, M. (1985) A new species of Gekko from Shaanxi. Acta Herpetologica Sinica, 4, 329 - 330.","Okada, Y. (1956) A new species of gekko from Shikoku, Japan. Annotationes Zoologicae Japonensis, 29, 239 - 241.","Zhou, K. & Wang, Q. (2008) New species of Gekko (Squamata: Sauria: Gekkonidae) from China: morphological and molecular evidence. Zootaxa, 1778, 59 - 68.","Matsui, T. & Okada, Y. (1968) A new species of Gekko found in Yakushima, one of the small island south of Kyushu. Acta Herpetologica Japonica, 3, 1 - 4.","Bourret, R. (1937 b) Notes herpetologiques sur l'Indochine francaise. XV. Lezards et Serpents recus au Laboratoire des Sciences Naturelles de l'Universite au cours de l'annee 1937. Descriptions de deux especes et de deux varietes nouvelles. Bulletin general de l'Instruction publique, 17 (4), annexe, 57 - 80.","Bourret, R. (1940 a \" 1939 \") Notes herpetologiques sur l'Indochine francaise. XVIII. Reptiles et Batraciens recus au Laboratoire des Sciences Naturelles de l'Universite au cours de l'annee 1939. Descriptions de quatre especes et d'une variete nouvelles. Bulletin general de l'Instruction publique, 18 (4), annexe, 5 - 39, 1 pl.","Bourret, R. (1943) Notes herpetologiques sur l'Indochine francaise. XXIV. Reptiles et Batraciens recus au Laboratoire des Sciences Naturelles de l'Universite au cours de l'annee 1942. Notes et travaux de l'Ecole Superieure des sciences de l'Universite Indochinoise, 2, 1 - 17, 2 pls.","Zhao, E. & Adler, K. (1993) Herpetology of China. Society for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles, Oxford, Ohio, 522 pp., 48 pls., 1 foldout map.","Welch, K. R. G. (1994) Lizards of the World. 1. Geckos. R & A Research and Information Limited, Taunton, 165 pp.","Bobrov, V. V. (1995 a) Checklist and bibliography of the Lizards of Vietnam. Smithsonian Herpetological Information Service, 105, 1 - 28.","Nguyen, V. S., Ho, T. C. & Nguyen, Q. T. (2005) A Checklist of Amphibians and Reptiles of Vietnam [in Vietnamese]. Agriculture Publishing House, Hanoi, 180 pp.","Nguyen, V. S. & Ho, T. C. (1996) A Checklist of the Reptiles and Amphibians of Vietnam [in Vietnamese]. Science and Technique Publishing House, Hanoi, 264 pp.","Ziegler, T., Ohler, A., Vu, N. T., Le, K. Q., Nguyen, X. T., Dinh, H. T. & Bui, N. T. (2006) Review of the amphibian and reptile diversity of Phong Nha-Ke Bang National Park and adjacent areas, central Truong Son, Vietnam. In: Vences, M., Kohler, J., Ziegler, T. & Bohme, W. (eds), Herpetologia Bonnensis II. Proceedings of the 13 th Congress of the Societas Europaea Herpetologica, Bonn, pp. 247 - 262.","Bobrov, V. V. & Semenov, D. V. (2008) Jastschjerizy Vietnama [Lizards of Vietnam]. Towarristschestowo nautschnyx isdanii KMK, Moscow, 225 pp.","Matsui, M. & Ota, H. (1995) On Chinese herpetology. Herpetologica, 51 (2), 234 - 250.","Smith, M. A. (1935) The Fauna of British India, Including Ceylon and Burma. Reptilia and Amphibia. II. Sauria. Taylor & Francis Ltd., London, xiii + 440 pp., 1 pl., 2 maps.","Nguyen, V. S., Ho, T. C. & Nguyen, Q. T. (2009) Herpetofauna of Vietnam. Edition Chimaira, Frankfurt am Main, 768 pp.","Stejneger, L. (1932) The Chinese lizards of the genus Gekko. Proceedings of the United States National Museum, 132, 1 - 6.","Zhao, E., Zhao, K. & Zhou, K. (1999) Fauna Sinica. Reptilia Vol. 2. Squamata, Lacertilia [in Chinese]. Science Press, Beijing, xi + 394 pp., 8 pls.","Kluge, A. G. (2001) Gekkotan lizard taxonomy. Hamadryad, 26, 1 - 209.","Gunther, R. (1994) Eine neue Art der Gattung Gekko (Reptilia, Squamata, Gekkonidae) aus dem Suden Vietnams. Zoologischer Anzeiger, 233, 57 - 67.","Henkel, F. W. & Schmidt, W. (2003) Praxis Ratgeber Geckos. Edition Chimaira, Frankfurt am Main, 159 pp.","Kluge, A. G. (1993) Gekkonoid Lizard Taxonomy. International Gecko Society, San Diego, 245 pp.","Bauer, A. M. (1994) Gekkonidae (Reptilia, Sauria), Part I Australia and Oceania. Das Tierreich 109 (Part). Walter de Gruyter, Berlin, XII + 306 pp.","Rosler, H. (2000) Kommentierte Liste der rezent, subrezent und fossil bekannten Gecko-Taxa (Reptilia: Gekkonomorpha). Gekkota, 2, 28 - 153.","Bauer, A. M. & Gunther, R. (1991) An annotated type catalogue of the geckos (Reptilia: Gekkonidae) in the Zoological Museum, Berlin. Mitteilungen aus dem Zoologischen Museum in Berlin, 67, 279 - 310.","Pope, C. H. (1935) The Reptiles of China. Turtles, Crocodilians, Snakes, Lizards. The American Museum of Natural History, New York, lii + 604 pp.","Rosler, H. & Tiedemann, F. (2007) Gekko melli Vogt, 1922 and its types (Reptilia, Sauria, Gekkonidae). Mitteilungen aus dem Museum fur Naturkunde in Berlin, Zoologische Reihe, 83, 105 - 108.","Huang, Z. Y. & Zong, Y. (1998) Zhongguo Techan de Paxing Dongwu. Fudan University, Shanghai, 116 pp."]}

Phelsuma klemmeri group (contains P. klemmeri) Affinities of this species to the P. lineata and P. laticauda groups are apparent and well-supported from our analysis (Fig. 7), but mitochondrial as well as nuclear markers place P. klemmeri at a basal position within the clade containing these two species groups. Because its colouration is very characteristic and strongly differs from all other Phelsuma, the isolated position of this species is best reflected by placing it in a separate species group. Phenotypically, several characters of P. klemmeri are in agreement with its affinities: non-gluing behaviour and absence of nostril-rostral contact are shared with the P. lineata and P. laticauda groups, and presence of smooth ventral and subcaudal scales, number of nasalia (3) as well as of size-reduced vertebral scales are similar to the P. laticauda group (Tables 1���2)., Published as part of Rocha, Sara, R��sler, Herbert, Gehring, Philip-Sebastian, Glaw, Frank, Posada, David, Harris, James & Vences, Miguel, 2010, Phylogenetic systematics of day geckos, genus Phelsuma, based on molecular and morphological data (Squamata: Gekkonidae), pp. 1-28 in Zootaxa 2429 on page 23, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.194693

Gekko canhi sp. n. Holotype: IEBR A.0910, adult male from Huu Lien (21 o 40 ’N, 106 o 20 ’E), Huu Lung, Lang Son Province, North Vietnam, collected in April 2004 by Doan Van Kien (Figs. 1 A, 2, 3). Paratypes: ZFMK 88879, adult female from Sa Pa, Lao Cai Province, collected in between 26 June to 8 July 2001 by Ho Thu Cuc (Fig. 1 B); VNMN 1001 –1002, adult females from Huu Lien, Lang Son Province, collected in June 2009 by Nguyen Thien Tao (Fig. 4 A). Diagnosis. Gekko canhi sp. n. can be distinguished from all congeners on the base of the following combination of characters: A medium-sized species of the genus Gekko with Description of holotype. Rostral rectangular, wider than high (maximum rostral width 4.2 mm, maximum rostral height 1.4 mm, RW/RH 3.0) and wider than mental, short rostral suture medially; supralabials 14 / 14; temporal region with several tubercles above snout; nares in contact with rostral and first supralabial; nasals 3 / 3; nasorostrals more or less square, double the size of supranasals; postnasals larger than nasorostrals; internasal rectangular, half as large as nasorostrals; snout medially with flat, elongate cavity; lateral snout scales oval, somewhat convex, juxtaposed, twice the size of those in midrostral region; 17–18 enlarged scales between postnasals and orbital height; 61 scales between seventh supralabials; medial snout scales oval, convex, juxtaposed; pupil vertically, with two small anterior tines and two large posterior tines; dorsal ciliary scales 2.5 times as large as medial snout scales, 5 / 5 spinous tubercles posteriorly; ear opening oblique/vertical, oval, about half as large as eye diameter, with skin fold above; interorbitals 49, granular, in orbital region twice the size in medial region; nuchal region scales granular, as large as medial interorbitals; tubercles in temporal and nuchal regions roundish, homogeneous, conical; mental triangular, wider than long (maximum mental width 3.4 mm, maximum mental length 2.2 mm, MW/ML 1.6), not distinctly larger than first infralabials; infralabials 12 / 13; postmentals 2, trapezoid, twice longer than wide and longer than length of mental, anteriorly in contact with mental and first infralabials; medial suture between postmentals longer than length of mental; gulars 7, bordering postmentals (of these, outer gulars larger than inner ones); outer postmentals twice as large than inner ones; gular scales as large as medial snout scales, round, flat, smooth, juxtaposed, in semi regular transversal rows; dorsals as large as medial snout scales round, convex, juxtaposed, in semi regular transversal rows; dorsal tubercles 2–3 times as large as adjoining dorsal scales, round to oval, convex, smooth, surrounded by 8–9 dorsal scales, in 11 semi regular longitudinal rows; lateral fold weakly developed, smooth, in width of 3 dorsal scales; ventrals between lateral folds 49; midbody scales in 170 rows; ventral scales between mental and cloacal slit 205; upper and lower arm scales slightly enlarged, smooth; forelimbs without tubercles; femoral scales anteriorly and ventrally smooth, dorsally and posteriorly granular; enlarged femorals lacking (i.e., no sharp transition between anteriorly larger and posteriorly smaller scales); tibial scales dorsally granular, ventrally flat, smooth; tibial tubercles conical, twice as large as surrounding granular scales; fingers and toes with narrow basal webbing; claws sheathed by three scales, with the dorsal scale smallest; subdigital lamellae 14 / 13 under first finger, 13 / 14 under fourth finger, 16 / 15 under first toe, and 15 / 14 under fourth toe; precloacal pores 5, in an angular series, medially separated by 5 smooth scales; enlarged scales posterior to precloacal pores in 11 rows; postcloacal tubercles 2 / 2, blunt, conical, ventrolkateral tubercles approximately half as the size of dorsolateral tubercles; original tail not thickened at base, with bands, and without tubercles; dorsal caudal scales as approximately twice the size of dorsal scales, squarish, flat, in regular transversal rows; third whorl in width of 11 dorsal scales; subcaudals flat, enlarged distal to second whorl; three subcaudals per whorl, with the last more distinctly enlarged; regenerated tail with distinctly broader subcaudals than beneath in orginal tail. Color in preservative (70 % ethanol): Upper side of head, back and tail sepia (478 U); snout until hind margin of eyes vermiculated, back of head with two twirl-like grey brown (481 U) blotches; neck with grey brown (481 U), wavy band; dorsum with narrow (1.5 mm wide), pale vertebral stripe, from neck to sacral region; dorsum traversed by 8 dark brown (4695 U), strongly serrated bands, fading to blotches from by base of tail; limbs with variable light blotches and bands; tail with four broad dark violet brown (497 U) and four thinner dark purple grey (4745 U) rings; regenerated part paler, with very fine black brown (476 U) blotches; underside of head, limbs and precloacal region buff (4745 U), belly grey brown (401 U). Variation. The female paratypes differ from the male holotype by several characters summarized as follows (see also Tables 1 and 2): They differ from the holotype by possession of distinctly smaller postcloacal tubercles and by the lack of perforated precloacal scales; two paratypes have dorsal tail tubercles, positioned at the end of the whorls; these tubercles are conical in the first whorl, and flat in whorls 2–3 / 4; dorsal bands are in part distinctly reduced in the female paratypes and are built up accentuated by pairs of oval blotches, which are medially separated by the light vertebral stripe; one paratype has an original tail that has 7 blackish brown (Black 2 U 2 X) and 6 light grey (406 U) transversal bands; regenerated tails of female paratypes are patternless. IEBR A.0910 ZFMK 88879 VNMN 1001 VNMN 1002 Mean±SD (variation) Color in life. Color in life unrecorded by us. Comparisons. Gekko canhi sp. n. differs from Vietnamese Gekko by the following characters (after Ngo et al. 2009; Ngo & Gamble 2009; Rösler et al. 2005): from G. badenii Szczerbak & Nekrasova (synonym G. ulikovskii Darevsky & Orlov; see Nguyen et al. 2009; Nguyen et al. in press) by a lower maximum snout vent length (99.2 versus 108.0 mm), fewer precloacal pores (5 versus 10–15), and a greater number of interorbitals (47–50 versus 30–46), scales along underside of body from mental to the front of cloacal slit (164–170 versus 136–145), scales around the middle of the body (205–229 versus 128–137), and ventrals (46–51 versus 29– 35); from G. g e c k o (Linnaeus) by nares contacting with rostral (versus not in contact); from G. grossmanni Günther by having fewer precloacal pores (5 versus 8–14), and more interorbitals (47–50 versus 38–46), scales along underside of body from mental to the front of cloacal slit (164–170 versus 139–165), scales around the middle of the body (205–229 versus 116–135), and ventrals (46–51 versus 26–31); from G. palmatus Boulenger by having fewer precloacal pores (5 versus 24–32), more interorbitals (47–50 versus 33– 47), scales along underside of body from mental to the front of cloacal slit (164–170 versus 172–199) and scales around the middle of the body (205–229 versus 139–156), as well as by reduced webbing between fingers and toes of G. palmatus; from G. russelltraini Ngo, Bauer, Wood & Grismer by having more interorbitals (47–50 versus 30–34), scales around the middle of the body (205–229 versus 90–107), ventrals (46–51 versus 28–30), and fewer precloacal pores (5 versus 8–11); from G. scientiadventura Rösler, Ziegler, Vu, Herrmann & Böhme by the presence of 11–12 dorsal tubercle rows (versus tubercles absent). Of the remaining Gekko species, Gekko canhi sp. n. differs as follows: from G. auriverrucosus Zhou & Liu by having snout vent length larger then 85 mm (versus G. auriverrucosus) and no cluster of large conical tubercles on upper edge of ear-opening (Zhou & Liu 1982); from G. albofasciolatus Günther; G. s i a m e n s i s Grossmann & Ulber; G. smithii Gray; G. verreauxi Tytler (after own data and Günther 1867, Ota et al. 1991); Gekko sp. “Tioman” (see Lim & Lim 1999, Hien et al. 2001, Grismer et al. 2002, Grismer et al. 2004, Grossmann & Tillack 2004, 2005, Koch et al. 2009) by having snout vent length less than 100 mm (versus> 150 mm) and additionally, except for G. verreauxi, which is endemic to the Andaman Islands, by contact between the nares and rostral (versus not in contact); from G. athymus Brown & Alcala; G. melli Vogt; G. subpalmatus Günther; and G. t a w a e n s i s Okada by the presence (versus absence) of dorsal tubercles (Brown & Alcala 1978; Okada 1956; Rösler et al. 2005; Rösler & Tiedemann 2007); from G. crombota Brown, Oliveros, Siler & Diesmos, G. ernstkelleri Rösler, Siler, Brown, Demegillo & Gaulke; G. gigante Brown & Alcala; G. kikuchii Oshima; G. mindorensis Taylor; G. monarchus (Schlegel); G. palawanensis Taylor; and G. ro m b l o n Brown & Alcala by having fewer precloacal pores ( 29) (Brown et al. 2008, Brown & Alcala 1978; Oshima 1912; Rösler et al. 2006); from G. vittatus Houttuyn by absence (versus presence) tubercles on throat and lateral fold (own data); from G. hokouensis Pope; G. liboensis Zhou & Li; G. scabridus Liu & Zhou; G. swinhonis Günther; and G. taibaiensis Song by having more interorbitals (47–50 versus et al. 1999); from G. petricolus Taylor; G. porosus Taylor; G. shibatai Toda, Sengoku, Hikida & Ota; G. similignum Smith; and G. vertebralis Toda, Sengoku, Hikida & Ota by a greater number of midbody scales (205–229 versus et al. 1995; Taylor 1962; Toda et al. 2008); from G. yakuensis Matsui & Okada by a higher snout vent length (99.2 mm versus 72.0 mm), more lamellae below first toe (13–16 versus 10), and by relatively larger postmentals and hind leg tubercles (Matsui & Okada, 1968); from G. japonicus (Schlegel) by a higher snout vent length (99.2 mm versus 74.0 mm), more interorbitals (47–50 versus 32–35), scales around the middle of the body (205–229 versus 130–144), ventrals (46–51 versus 39–44), lamellae below first toe (13–16 versus 10–12), and fewer precloacal pores (5 versus 6– 9), and absence of dorsal tail tubercles (Goris & Maeda 2004; Ota et al. 1989, Zhao et al. 1999), for more detailed comparisons, see below; from G. wenxianensis Zhou & Wang by a higher snout vent length (99.2 mm versus 59.0 mm), more ventrals (47–50 versus 44), more subdigital lamellae under first toe (13–16 versus 6) and fourth toe (14–17 versus 9), separated precloacal pores (versus not separated) and smaller dorsal tubercles (3 times versus 4–6 times size of adjacent dorsals) (Zhou & Wang 2008). Etymology. We name this new species in honor of Professor Dr. Le Xuan Canh, director of the Institute of Ecology and Biological Resources in Hanoi, in recognition of his support and contribution towards biodiversity research in Vietnam. As common names we suggest Canh’s Gecko (English), Tắc kè cảnh (Vietnamese), and Canhs Gecko (German). Distribution. The species is currently known only from northern Vietnam: Lang Son and Lao Cai provinces (Fig. 5). Due to the proximity with the Chinese border, we suspect that the species additionally may occur in southern China as well. Ecological notes. The type series were found in evergreen secondary forest at elevation at 200 m in Huu Lien (Fig. 4 B) and 1500 m in Sa Pa.

Phelsuma andamanense group (contains P. andamanense) A single species of Phelsuma is known from the geographically most disparate archipelago colonized by this genus, the Andaman Islands, in the Bay of Bengal, with a surface of over 6,000 km 2 and extensive tropical rainforest surface. Phylogenetic relationships of this species remain unresolved (isolated in the basal polytomy of the genus, Rocha et al. 2009), although possible affinities to the P. mutabilis group were detected in some analyses. The basal phylogenetic position of P. andamanense indicates that it has colonized the Andamans relatively early. It is intriguing that despite this early colonization, apparently no radiation has occurred on this archipelago, unlike what has happened on the Mascarenes, Seychelles, and Comoros. P. andamanense is a green-coloured non-gluer with smooth ventral and subcaudal scales and without nostril-rostral contact or size-reduced vertebral scales. Except for the colour these characters agree with those observed in the P. m u t a b i l i s group (Tables 1���2)., Published as part of Rocha, Sara, R��sler, Herbert, Gehring, Philip-Sebastian, Glaw, Frank, Posada, David, Harris, James & Vences, Miguel, 2010, Phylogenetic systematics of day geckos, genus Phelsuma, based on molecular and morphological data (Squamata: Gekkonidae), pp. 1-28 in Zootaxa 2429 on pages 23-24, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.194693, {"references":["Rocha S., Vences M., Glaw F., Posada D., Harris D. J., 2009. Multigene phylogeny of Malagasy day geckos of the genus Phelsuma. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 52, 530 - 537."]}

Key to species of Goniurosaurus (modified from Grismer et al. 1994, 1999, 2002) 1 a Precloacal pores absent; claws not sheathed by scales (G. k u ro i w a e group)............................................ 7 1 b Precloacal pores present; claws sheathed by scales.................................................................................. 2 2a 37 – 46 precloacal pores ................................................................................................ G.bawanglingensis 2 b 16–32 precloacal pores.............................................................................................................................. 3 3 a Enlarged row of supraorbital tubercles..................................................................................................... 4 3 b No enlarged row of supraorbital tubercle.................................................................................................. 5 4 a Postrostral (internasal) lacking (supranasals meeting in midline); outer surface of upper eyelid composed of granular scales of about the same size of those on top of head; outer surface of upper eyelid with a longish row of enlarged tubercles; 16–21 precloacal pores .............................. G. catbaensis sp.n. 4 b At least a single postrostral scale present (supranasals not in contact); outer surface of upper eyelid composed of granular scales one-half the size of those on top of head; outer surface of upper eyelid lacking a longish row of enlarged tubercles; 23–29 precloacal pores. ............................................................. G. luii 5 a Three wide dorsal bands between limb insertions; nuchal loop posteriorly protracted; deep axillary pockets present .......................................................................................................................... G. araneus 5 b Two narrow dorsal bands between limb insertions; nuchal loop posteriorly rounded; usually without deep axillary pockets, although present in some individuals of G. lichtenfelderi (G. lichtenfelderi group)................................................................................................................................................................... 6 6a 43 – 56 eyelid fringe scales; 24 paravertebral tubercles (NE Vietnam and some nearby islands in the Gulf of Tonkin) .......................................................................................................................... G. lichtenfelderi 6 b 55–68 eyelid fringe scales; 26–29 paravertebral tubercles (Hainan Island, China) ............ G. hainanensis 7 a Yellow brown to gold iris; a single scale at the base of each digit which is occasionally slightly enlarged ............................................................................................................................................. G. yamashinae 7 b Blood-red iris; one to three enlarged scales at the base of each digit on the hand and foot..................... 8 8 a Adults lack interspace mottling................................................................................................................. 9 8 b Adults with interspace mottling.............................................................................................................. 10 9 a Robust body stature; dorsal body tubercles between the limb insertions in cross-section are triangular to elliptical and sharply keeled anteriorly; 34–42 paravertebral tubercles; ventrals are juxtaposed and sharply raised ............................................................................................................................ G. toyamai 9 b Slender body stature; dorsal body tubercles between the limb insertions in cross-section are smooth or very weakly keeled; 22–29 paravertebral tubercles; ventrals are flat, wide, and subimbricate to imbricate ................................................................................................................................................ G.splendens 10 a Dorsal banding absent or incomplete ..................................................................................... G.kuroiwae 10 b Prominent dorsal pattern consisting of transverse bands between the nape of the neck and the caudal constriction (only the first band in the vicinity of the forelimb insertion may be incomplete or rarely absent) ..................................................................................................................................... G. orientalis

Goniurosaurus catbaensis sp. n. Holotype. IEBR A.0717, an adult male (Figs. 1–2), from Cat Ba Island, Cat Hai District, Hai Phong City, northern Vietnam, collected by Roswitha Stenke, Nguyen Quang Truong and Thomas Ziegler on 23 May 2007 near Tra Bau Ranger Station in Ong Bi valley at an altitude of ca. 10–20 m above sea level. Paratypes. All from Cat Ba Island, Cat Hai District, Hai Phong City, northern Vietnam, collected by Roswitha Stenke, Nguyen Quang Truong and Thomas Ziegler at an altitude of ca. 10–30 m above sea level: MHNG 2699.49, a subadult to adult male (Fig. 3), coll. 20 May 2007 in the surroundings of Trung Trang Cave; VNUH 210507, an adult female (Fig. 4), coll. 21 May 2007 near Ang Dai valley; and ZFMK 87056, an adult male, coll. 23 May 2007 near Tra Bau Ranger Station in Ong Bi valley. Diagnosis. A species of the genus Goniurosaurus, characterized by a combination of the following characters: 1) gracile body and limbs; 2) thin, posteriorly protracted nuchal loop; 3) three (or four) thin immaculate dorsal body bands between limb insertions, without dark spotting and with dark, narrow border surrounding the body bands; 4) mottled dorsal surface and maculate limbs; 5) head pattern consisting of a dark marbling; 6) iris orange-brown; 7) lack of postrostral (internasal) scales (supranasals meeting in midline behind the rostral suture); 8) 5–6 nasal scales surrounding the nare; 9) greatly enlarged row of supraorbital tubercles; 10) outer surface of the upper eyelid composed of granular scales of about the same size of those on top of head and with a longish row of 6–9 enlarged tubercles; 11) 52–55 eyelid fringe scales; 12) 8–9 supralabials, and 6–8 sublabials; 13) granular body scales, with 8–11 granular scales surrounding the dorsal tubercles; 14) deep axillary pockets; 15) long, thin digits with wide subdigital lamellae and claws being sheathed by four scales; 16) 16–21 precloacal pores. Description of holotype. Adult male; SVL 111.5 mm; TaL 101.5 mm; SE 12.6 mm; EE 11.5 mm; HW 20.7 mm; HH 12.6 mm; HL 30.6 mm; SVL: TaL 1.10; SVL: HL 3.64; HL: HW 1.48; HL: HH 2.43; SE: EE 1.10; head triangular, wider than neck, covered with uniform granular scales interspersed with tubercles in the temporal and occipital regions; scales of rostrum slightly larger and flatter; conspicuous row of enlarged supraorbital tubercles; middorsal portion of rostral partially sutured dorsomedially, bordered laterally by first supralabial, dorsolaterally by prenasal, and dorsally by two supranasals; postrostral (internasal) scales are lacking; external nares bordered by five nasals each: anteriorly by prenasal and supranasal, dorsally by supranasal, posteriorly by two slightly enlarged postnasals and one smaller granular scale, and ventrally by the prenasal; prenasals with long recurved ventral portion; supranasals triangular, meeting in midline behind rostral suture; supralabials nine / eight, grading into granular scales posteriorly; eyes relatively large, pupils vertical; eyelid fringe scales (ciliaria) 54 / 52, those of upper eyelid slightly enlarged; outer surface of upper eyelid composed of granular scales of about the same size of those on top of head, including a longish row of ca. six enlarged tubercles; a fold of skin originating in the suborbital region extends posteroventrally across the angle of the jaw; external auditory meatus elliptical with long axis directed dorsoventrally; tympanum deeply recessed; mental triangular, bordered laterally by first infralabial and posteriorly by three postmentals; postmentals bordered by six gular scales; infralabials eight / eight, grading posteriorly into smaller scales; gular scales juxtaposed and granular, abruptly grading posteriorly into flat hexagonal pectoral scales and even larger ventral scales. Neck narrower than body, covered with uniform granular scales interspersed with several sharply pointed conical tubercles on nape; tubercles on flanks conical, those of vertebral region somewhat lower in profile; body tubercles not increasing in size posteriorly, grading into somewhat more pointed caudal tubercles; dorsal body tubercles surrounded by 10 granular scales; 23 dorsal tubercle rows at midbody; 33 paravertebral tubercles between limb insertions, distinct vertebral row of scales absent. Limbs relatively long and thin, covered dorsally with granular scales interspersed with several tubercles and ventrally with flat juxtaposed to subimbricate scales; dorsal granular scales grade into slightly flattened subimbricate scales on top of pes and manus; hind limbs slightly larger than forelimbs; larger granular scales on ventral surfaces of pes and manus; deep axillary pockets present; subdigital lamellae wide, 12 / 12 on first finger, 16 / 15 on second finger, 18 / 17 on third finger, 18 / 19 on fourth finger, 19 / 18 on fifth finger, as well as 11 / 12 on first toe, 17 / 15 on second toe, 19 / 20 on third toe, 23 / 24 on fourth toe, and 21 / 22 on fifth toe; digits laterally compressed, increasing in length from first to fourth, fifth shorter than fourth. Body relatively long and thin, covered with granular scales grading ventrally into larger hexagonal flattened subimbricate ventral scales; 127 scales around midbody; larger ventral scales grade abruptly into smaller granular scales immediately anterior to the vent at the level of the preanal pores; 16 preanal pores in a transverse continuous series beginning and ending somewhat beyond the hind limb insertions; region posterior to vent covered with flat juxtaposed scales and greatly swollen, containing three enlarged tubercles (postcloacal tubercles) laterally on each side at the level of the vent. Tail long and thin, thickest at base, anteriorly with whorls; dorsal tail scales flat, smooth, up to 1.5 times the size of dorsal scales, arranged in more or less regular transverse rows; the first tail whorl with five, the fourth and eighth with six scale rows; the first whorl with six, the fourth whorl with five, and the eighth whorl with one tubercles in a transversal series; caudal tubercles occur in hemiwhorls, being present only dorsally and fading laterally and posteriorly; ventral caudals larger than dorsal caudals. Coloration in life: Dorsal ground colour of head, body and limbs grey-brown to pale brown and mottled with dark brown blotches; iris orange-brown; thin posteriorly tapered dull yellow nuchal loop present, anterior ends inserting on lower eyelids, edged dorsally and ventrally in dark brown; three thin immaculate yellowish bands on body between limb insertions, and another one on tail base, all edged anteriorly and posteriorly by thin dark brown bands; ground colour of tail grey brown to dark brown, tail base mottled; five immaculate white caudal bands edged anteriorly and posteriorly in solid black; ventral surfaces of head, body and limbs dull white and immaculate except for few dark spots on limbs; weak brown lateral spotting in gular region and on venter and limbs; subcaudal region dark brown with distinct lighter interspaces between caudal bands; caudal bands complete ventrally except for first. Variation of paratypes. The paratype series largely corresponds to the description of the holotype. For measurements, proportions and scalation data of the paratypes, which all have regenerated tails, see Table 1. However, the external nares of the specimens VNUH 210507 and MHNG 2699.49 are bordered by six instead five nasals each: anteriorly by prenasal and supranasal, dorsally by supranasal, posteriorly by two slightly enlarged postnasals and two smaller granular scales, and ventrally by the prenasal. In addition, the surface of the upper eyelid of the paratype series contains a longish row of up to nine enlarged tubercles, and the postmentals are bordered by up to eight gular scales. With respect to the immaculate yellowish body bands between limb insertions, specimens VNUH 210507 and MHNG 2699.49 show a somewhat differing banded pattern: MHNG 2699.49 has an additional yellowish-orange band in front of the last (and in addition incomplete) band, which consists of a series of three large light blotches, and VNUH 210507 has an additional, incomplete band that is medially fused with the last body band. VNUH 210507 and MHNG 2699.49 also have only four immaculate white caudal bands. The light caudal bands are complete ventrally in all paratypes. Further records. Five further specimens could be observed on Cat Ba Island. Three of them were collected, and two of them released after photography (Fig. 5). The remaining specimen is currently kept alive for behavioural studies in Vietnam and will subsequently be donated to the scientific collection of the Cat Ba National Park. All three collected specimens corresponded in external morphology and colour pattern with the holotype description. The latter three specimens had three thin immaculate yellowish bands on body between limb insertions and lacked one or more postrostral (internasal) scales, thus having the supranasals in broad contact behind the rostral suture. Etymology. The specific name refers to the type locality Cat Ba Island. The scientific name emphasizes the importance and uniqueness of the Biosphere Reserve Cat Ba Archipelago, Hai Phong, which also houses an endemic primate, the Cat Ba langur Trachypithecus p. poliocephalus (Roos et al. 2001). We propose the standard name “Cat Ba Leopard Gecko”. Comparisons. The new species most closely resembles G. l u i i, from which it consistently differs by lacking postrostral (internasal) scales and by having the supranasals meeting in midline behind the rostral suture (Fig. 6): Besides the G. l u i i listed in Table 2 we studied thirteen additional G. luii from continental China and Vietnam (i.e., another record from Cao Bang Province, Vietnam, and three specimens from China kept in the Cologne Zoo, as well as nine Chinese specimens from the private holdings of one of the authors [HR]), which all had the supranasals separated by at least one postrostral scale (see holotype description in Grismer et al. 1999: 383), whereas the type series and further records of G. catbaensis sp. n. (n = 7) consistently lacked a postrostral and thus had the supranasals in broad contact. Also the Chinese specimen depicted on page 159 in Seufer et al. (2005) shows the supranasals being separated by at least one postrostral scale. G. catbaensis sp. n. further differs from G. l u i i in having the outer surface of the upper eyelid composed of granular scales of about the same size of those on top of head (versus small granular scales one-half the size of those on top of head in G. luii, see Grismer et al. 1999: 383), including a longish row of ca. six to nine enlarged tubercles (which is lacking in G. luii). In addition, the type series of G. catbaensis sp. n. had fewer dorsal tubercles in the eighth caudal whorl compared with G. luii (one versus 3–6), fewer precloacal pores (5–21 versus 21–29 in G. luii), a lower number of nasal scales surrounding the nare (5.1 ± 0.4 versus 6.8 ± 0.8 in G. l u i i), fewer supra- and sublabial counts (8–9 and 6–8 versus 9–12 and 8–11 in G. l u i i), and a lower count of granular scales surrounding the dorsal tubercles (9.8 ± 1.3) versus 12.2 ± 1.3 in the type series of G. l u i i and versus 12.3 ± 1.3 in the four continental G. l u i i listed in Table 2. Concerning the colour pattern, it is most obvious that the nuchal loop is thinner and much more tapered backwards (v-shaped) in G. catbaensis sp. n. than it is the case in G. luii; furthermore, the dark head pattern rather consists of a dark marbling in G. catbaensis sp. n. instead of dark brown blotches in G. l u i i. G. catbaensis sp. n. differs from all other species of Goniurosaurus in having a greatly enlarged row of supraorbital tubercles. With respect to the remaining Vietnamese species, G. catbaensis sp. n. additionally differs from G. a r a n e u s in lacking wide body bands and nuchal loop, in having a mottled dorsal surface, which is nearly immaculate and lacking mottling in G. araneus, in having maculate versus nearly immaculate limbs, having fewer precloacal pores (16–21 versus 23–29), and having granular body scales as opposed to elongate dorsal body scales. G. catbaensis sp. n. differs from G. lichtenfelderi in having a gracile body and limbs as opposed to being more compact and robust, having 3–4 versus two dorsal body bands, dark, narrow border surrounding the body bands as opposed to a wide border, a posteriorly protracted nuchal loop as opposed to being rounded posteriorly, and deep axillary pockets. C. catbaensis sp. n. differs from C. hainanensis in having a gracile body and limbs versus more compact and robust, having 3–4 versus two dorsal body bands, lacking dark spotting in body bands, having a posteriorly protracted nuchal loop as opposed to being rounded posteriorly, deep axillary pockets, and 16–21 precloacal pores as opposed to 26–32. C. catbaensis sp. n. differs from C. bawanglingensis by lacking a more robust body stature, by having long, thin digits as opposed to short, robust digits, having immaculate body bands as opposed to a boldly mottled dorsal ground colour with dark spotting in the body bands, by having the outer surface of the upper eyelid composed of granular scales of about the same size of those on top of head (versus granular scales being smaller than the granular scales on the top of the head), by having 16–21 precloacal pores as opposed to 37– 46, and by having a lower number of eyelid fringe scales (52–55 versus 56–67). G. catbaensis sp. n. further differs from the G. k u ro i w a e group in having a gracile body and limbs as opposed to being more compact and robust, dark, narrow border surrounding the body bands as opposed to a wide border, a posteriorly protracted nuchal loop as opposed to being rounded posteriorly, having precloacal pores and deep axillary pockets, having wide versus narrow subdigital lamellae, and claws being sheathed by four scales, as opposed to being unsheathed and surrounded by 6–8 scales (Grismer et al. 1999, 2002). Distribution. The new species is known only from Cat Ba Island (Figs. 7–8). Natural history. G. catbaensis sp. n. was found active at night in limestone forest (Fig. 5). The geckos were mainly found on the forest ground but some of them also on limestone cliffs in up to 2–3 m height. Specimens were found in the surroundings of large limestone caves (Fig. 9) with parts of primary forest vegetation and in the vicinity of primary shrub vegetation on limestone. Once disturbed, the geckos tried to escape into rock holes and crevices.

Cyrtodactylus stresemanni sp. nov. Figs. 1–8 Holotype ZSM 249 / 1911 (field number "coll. E. Stresemann 185 "), adult male, from "Batang Padang-Tal, 800–900 m " (jar label) [near the town Tapah, Perak province, Malaysia], collected by E. Stresemann, on 7 Oktober 1910 during the second "Freiburger Molukken Expedition". Diagnosis: A medium-sized Cyrtodactylus with a total length of 190 mm (SVL 95.5 mm), head distinct from neck, body slender, venter flat, tail base not enlarged. Cyrtodactylus stresemanni can be distinguished from all other species of the genus by the following combination of characters: 13 supralabials; 10 infralabials; 13 longitudinal rows of dorsal tubercles; conical tubercles along the lateral skin folds; 63 ventrals between the lateral skin folds; a deep, narrow preanal groove; femoral scales and femoral pores not enlarged; subcaudals not enlarged; tubercles on dorsal and ventral side of the tail; vertebral stripe grey-brown; three pairs of brown-olive, elongated markings on the back; tail with distinct bands. Description of holotype: SVL 95.5 mm, TL 94.0 mm (incomplete), HL 25.0 mm, HW 18.0 mm, HH 10.2 mm, SH 44.0 mm, SE 11.4 mm, EE 9.6 mm, DE 5.0 mm, DEA 1.3 mm. Proportion of SVL / HL 3.82, SVL / SH 2.17, HL / HW 1.39, HL / HH 2.45, DE / DEA 3.85; SE / EE 1.19. Rostral scale 1.6 times broader than tall, as broad as mental, above with a straight, inversely, Y-shaped rostral suture. 13 / 13 supralabials (10 / 9 until center of eye), 4 scales between supralabial and eye; nostril in contact with rostral and first supralabial, 4 / 4 nasal scales, nasorostral scales 2 times larger than supranasals and 3 times larger than postnasals, 2 equally sized internasals (see Fig. 1); scales in contact with supralabials flat, smooth, equally sized as postnasals, scales on snout round to ovoid, conical, juxtaposed, median scales on snout 2 times larger than granules on head; snout and parietal region deepened; pupil vertical, anterior border straight, posterior border with 2 serrations; ciliaries anteriorly 3 times larger than posteriorly; ear opening oblique; interorbital region and skull posterior to interorbital region with small, round granules; several enlarged tubercles in the orbital region, 56 scales between the eyes; tubercles on posterior head and neck convex, 3 times larger than adjacent granules; no tubercles below a line marked by angle of mouth and ear opening. Mental triangular, broader than long; 10 / 10 infralabials; 2 postmentals, 3 times longer than broad, suture between postmentals separated from mental by more than 50 %; 9 scales in contact with postmentals; scales on throat granular, of same size as interorbital scales (see Fig. 2). Dorsal scales granular, 2 times larger than interorbital scales, irregularly arranged; dorsal tubercles triangular, conical, keeled, arranged in 13 more or less regular longitudinal rows, in contact with 12 dorsals, 5–7 granules between two tubercles of one row, tubercles dorsolaterally 4 times larger than dorsals; lateral skin fold poorly developed with 17 / 17 large, conical tubercles, 2–7 (mostly 6–7) granules between tubercles (see Fig. 3). Ventral scales thickened, subimbricate, 2 times larger than dorsals, at midbody 63 ventrals between the lateral skin folds. Forelimbs dorsally with granules, mixed with conical and triangular, slightly keeled tubercles; hindlimbs dorsally with granules, mixed with conical and triangular tubercles, ventrally in femoral region a distinct border between large, slightly convex, imbricate scales anteriorly and small granules posteriorly, scales in femoral region not enlarged; ventral side of lower hindlimb with thickened, imbricate scales; fingers and toes with claws, without clearly recognizable webbing at the base, claw in contact with two scales, 13 / 12 subdigital lamellae below first toe (the 5 / 5 most basal scales enlarged) and 23 / 20 subdigital lamellae below fourth toe (10 / 7 enlarged). About 10 preanal pores in a deep, narrow, elongated groove, preanal groove in contact with 2 rows of enlarged, thickened, imbricate scales (see Fig. 4); 2 / 2 triangular, thickened, oblique, postanal tubercles (dorsally larger than ventrally). Tail round, with distinct whorls, not thickened at its base; tail dorsally with granules, 1.5 times larger than head scales, at the beginning and end of each whorl arranged in a regular transversal row; in first whorl dorsally 13 scale rows; first whorl with 10, third whorl with 9 and fifth whorl with 8 tubercles, arranged ring-shaped around the tail; tail tubercles dorsally and laterally ovoid, spiny, with single keel; ventrolateral and ventral tail tubercles flat, smooth, or keeled (see Fig. 5 and 6); subcaudals convex, subimbricate, at most 3 times larger than dorsal scales on tail. Colour in preservative (ca. 70 % alcohol, after almost 100 years): Head dorsally brown-olive, labials and ciliaries with a pattern of light and dark; a broad brown-olive stripe from nostril to anterior eye; neck with triangular, blackish-olive, darkly bordered spot; broad, brown-olive postocular stripe to neck; throat yellowolive; vertebral stripe grey-brown, anteriorly V-shaped, fusing at midbody with the light lateral colouration, posteriorly with the first band on the tail; dorsolaterally three distinctly bordered, brown-olive, elongated spots, the two anterior ones 4 times longer than broad, the posterior one in the region of the tail base 2 times longer than broad, the anterior one in contact with postocular stripe (see Fig. 7); ventral side olive, preanal region yellow-olive; tail dorsally with a narrow band at its base, followed by two broad, pale brown rings, broad interspace blackish-olive; tail ventrally olive, interrupted by the light rings. Comparisons: Cyrtodactylus stresemanni is only known from a single individual which, however, is apparently distinguishable from all other Cyrtodactylus species by the presence of large tubercles on the ventral side of the tail. Furthermore, C. stresemanni differs by more ventral scales (see table 1) from C. aaroni Günther & Rösler, 2003, C. adleri Das, 1997, C. aequalis Bauer, 2003, C. agusanensis (Taylor, 1915), C. angularis (Smith, 1921), C. annandalei Bauer, 2003, C. ayeyarwadyensis Bauer, 2003, C. baluensis (Mocquard, 1890), C. biordinis Brown & McCoy, 1980, C. brevidactylus Bauer, 2002, C. brevipalmatus (Smith, 1923), Cyrtodactylus buchardi David, Teynié & Ohler, 2004, C. caovansungi Orlov, Truong, Nazarov, Ananjeva & Sang, 2007, C. chanhomeae Bauer, Sumontha & Pauwels, 2003, C. chauquangensis Quang, Orlov, Ananjeva, Johns, Thao & Vinh, 2007, C. chrysopylos Bauer, 2003, C. condorensis (Smith, 1921), C. cracens Batuwita & Bahir, 2005, C. darmandvillei (Weber, 1890), C. derongo Brown & Parker, 1973, C. deveti (Brongersma, 1948), C. edwardtaylori Batuwita & Bahir, 2005, C. elok Dring, 1979, C. feae (Boulenger, 1893), C. fraenatus (Günther, 1864), C. fumosus (Müller, 1895), C. gansi Bauer, 2003, C. gubernatoris (Annandale, 1913), C. ingeri Hikida, 1990, C. interdigitalis Ulber, 1993, C. intermedius (Smith, 1917), C. irianjayaensis Rösler, 2000, C. irregularis (Smith, 1921), C. jarujini Ulber, 1993, C. jellesmae (Boulenger, 1897), C. khasiensis (Jerdon, 1870), C. laevigatus (Darevsky, 1964), C. malcolmsmithi (Constable, 1949), C. matsuii Hikida, 1990, C. mimikanus (Boulenger, 1914), C. oldhami (Theobald, 1876), C. papilionoides Ulber & Grossmann, 1991, C. paradoxus (Darevsky & Szczerbak, 1997), C. peguensis (Boulenger, 1893), C. phongnhakebangensis Ziegler, Rösler, Herrmann & Vu 2003, C. quadrivirgatus Taylor, 1962, C. russelli Bauer, 2003, C. ramboda Batuwita & Bahir, 2005, C. seribuatensis Youmans & Grismer, 2006, C. sermowaiensis (De Rooij, 1915), C. slowinskii Bauer, 2002, C. soba Batuwita & Bahir, 2005, C. subsolanus Batuwita & Bahir, 2005, C. sumonthai Bauer, Pauwels & Chanhome, 2002, C. sworderi (Smith, 1925), C. thirakhupti Pauwels, Bauer, Sumontha & Chanhome, 2004, C. tigroides Bauer, Sumontha & Pauwels, 2003, C. tiomanensis Das & Lim, 2000, C. tuberculatus (Lucas & Frost, 1900), C. variegatus (Blyth, 1859), C. wakeorum Bauer, 2003, C. wetariensis (Dunn, 1927), and C. yoshii Hikida, 1990. Cyrtodactylus stresemanni differs by a larger SVL and the presence of a preanal groove from C. annulatus (Taylor, 1915), C. consobrinoides (Annandale, 1905), and C. malayanus (De Rooij, 1915); by a smaller SVL and the absence of preanofemoral pores from C. loriae (Boulenger, 1898), C. louisiadensis (De Vis, 1892), and C. novaeguineae (Schlegel, 1837); by small instead of enlarged subcaudals from C. consobrinus (Peters, 1871); by fewer dorsal rows of tubercles from C. lateralis (Werner, 1896) and C. murua Kraus & Allison, 2006; by the absence of femoral pores from C. redimiculus King, 1962 (table 1). Eleven Cyrtodactylus species (agamensis, aurensis, cavernicolus, marmoratus, papuensis, philippinicus, pubisulcus, pulchellus, rubidus, sadleiri, semenanjungensis) and C. stresemanni are known to have a preanal groove. C. stresemanni differs by a larger SVL and fewer dorsal rows of tubercles from C. agamensis (Bleeker, 1860), C. cavernicolus Inger & King, 1961, C. papuensis (Brongersma, 1934), C. philippinicus (Steindachner, 1867), and C. pubisulcus Inger, 1957; by more ventral scales and fewer dorsal rows of tubercles from C. marmoratus Gray, 1831, C. sadleiri Wells & Wellington, 1985, and C. semenanjungensis Grismer & Leong, 2005; by more ventral scales and not enlarged subcaudals from C. aurensis Grismer, 2005, C. pulchellus Gray, 1828, and C. rubidus (Blyth, 1860) (see table 1). Cyrtodactylus stresemanni differs from all species of the subgenus Geckoella sensu Rösler (2000) by larger SVL and the presence of a preanal groove and furthermore by more ventral scales from C. (Geckoella) albofasciatus (Boulenger, 1885), C. (G.) deccanensis (Günther, 1864), C. (G.) jeyporensis (Beddome, 1877), C. (G.) nebulosus (Beddome, 1870), and C. (G.) triedrus (Günther, 1864) and by more supralabials and infralabials from C. (G.) collegalensis (Beddome, 1870) and C. (G.) yakhuna (Deraniyagala, 1945). Further characters (head tubercles, tubercles on the lateral skin fold, tubercles on limbs, subdigital lamellae below fourth toe) which allow a distinction of C. stresemanni from other Cyrtodactylus species are provided in table 1. Among the Cyrtodactylus species which are known to have a preanal groove there is only one with a junior synonym (syn. fide De Rooij 1915): Cyrtodactylus marmoratus quadrilineatus Werner, 1896. This taxon differs from C. stresemanni by the lack of tubercles on the lateral skin folds (Werner 1896). Etymology: The species is dedicated to the famous ornithologist Erwin Stresemann who has collected the holotype. Distribution and habitat: The single known specimen of C. stresemanni was collected almost 100 years ago in a mountain range that was largely covered with rainforest and inhabited by a native tribe called "Sakai". Since no additional specimens have been discovered in the meantime, it appears likely that the new species might be locally endemic in western Malaysia. Stresemann provided additional information about the expedition in a letter to his parents (Haffer 1997: 864–866) which may allow future expeditions to locate the type locality more precisely: " Wie ich Euch schon schrieb, erfuhren wir hier bei unserer Ankunft am 15. September, dass unser Boot erst am 30. Oktober hier eintreffen würde. Wir entschlossen uns bald zu einer kleinen Expedition nach der Halbinsel und zwar in das Gebirge von Perak, um dort zoologisches und ethnologisches Material zu sammeln. Nach etwa 10 Tagen waren wir mit unseren Vorbereitungen zu Ende und fuhren mit der äußerst komfortablen Bahn Singapore-Penang, die meist mitten durch unzugänglichen Urwald führt, in etwa 6 Stunden zu unserem Ausgangspunkt Tapah, ein größerer Ort mit buntgemischter Bevölkerung [...]. Nach 3 Tagen begann von hier der Marsch ins Gebirge, das Gepäck konnte zunächst mit Ochsenwagen 12 Meilen weit geführt werden, wo sich ein stattliches Rasthaus befand. Wir nahmen hier abermals mehrtägigen Aufenthalt, ich begann zu sammeln und wir machten unsere erste Bekanntschaft mit den Sakais [...] und wir brachten es nach einigen Tagen dahin, daß wir mit 21 Sakaiträgern zu unserem weiteren Marsch in die höheren Gebirgslagen aufbrechen konnten: nach 3 interessanten Marschtagen, stets durch dichten Urwald mit oft sehr schönen Flußtälern und herrlicher Palmenvegetation, erreichten wir in etwa 1200 m Höhe unser vorgesehenes Stammquartier. Hier an der Grenze der Staaten Perak und Parang befand sich eine vom Staate vor vielen Jahren errichtete, mit Blechplatten gedeckte Hütte, die bereits vor uns von einer Expedition als Stammquartier genutzt worden war. Wir gedachten hier etwa 3 Wochen zu bleiben und zu sammeln. Zoologisch war alles hier sehr interessant und wertvoll, auf Exkursionen erreichten wir den Gipfel des höchsten Berges der Umgebung mit 1800 m ". Systematic position: The large tubercles on the ventral side of the tail of C. stresemanni appear to be unique in the genus Cyrtodactylus. The combination of the characters: (1) tubercles on the lateral skin fold, (2) presence of a preanal groove, and (3) not enlarged subcaudals reveal morphological similarities to C. papuensis, C. philippinicus, C. pubisulcus, and C. rubidus. However, close relationships of C. stresemanni with any of these species appear to be unlikely. The closest relative of C. papuensis is possibly C. marmoratus (Rösler et al. in press). In C. philippinicus the preanal pores are visible and not hidden in the preanal groove. In C. annulatus, the preanal pores are visible and arranged in a very acute angle (see Fig. 2 in Brown & Alcala 1978). C. rubidus was placed in the C. pulchellus group (Smith 1935). The geographic distribution also does not suggest close relationships of C. stresemanni with one of the four species which are all island-endemics without recognizable relations to Malaysia: C. papuensis (New Guinea), C. philippinicus (Philippines), C. pubisulcus (Borneo), and C. rubidus (Andaman islands). C. stresemanni shares a close overall resemblance to two other Malaysian species, C. brevipalmatus and C. elok (Grismer, pers. comm.). However, C. stresemanni differs from C. brevipalmatus by larger maximum SVL (95.5 vs. 72 mm), presence of tubercles on the head, number of ventral scales (63 vs. 35–44), presence of a preanal groove, absence of femoral pores and nonenlarged median subcaudals (see table 1). C. stresemanni differs from C. elok by larger maximum SVL (95.5 vs. 67.5 mm), number of supralabials (13 vs. 11–12), number of longitudinal rows of dorsal tubercles (13 vs. 6–10), number of ventral scales (63 vs. 44), presence of a preanal groove, number of preanal pores (10 vs. 8), number of subdigital lamellae/scales on 4 th toe (20–23 vs. 18–19), and non-enlarged median subcaudals (see table 1).

Cyrtodactylus cryptus sp. n. Figures 1–6 Holotype. An adult male (ZFMK 86037), Phong Nha - Ke Bang National Park, Quang Binh province, central Vietnam, collected by Dang Ngoc Kien on 7 July 2006 in the limestone forest of U Bo at an altitude of ca. 520 m. Description of holotype. SVL 92.5 mm; TaL 69.5 mm (of which 28.0 mm are regenerated); HL 22.0 mm; HW 17.7 mm; HH 8.8 mm; SE 9.7 mm; EE 7.4 mm; DE 3.6 mm; DEA 0.9 mm. Proportion of SVL / HL 4.21; HL / HW 1.5; HL / HH 2.5; SE / EE 1.31; DE / DEA 4.0. Rostral scale 1.4 times wider than high, paritially divided dorsally with a straight median suture extending to the centre of the scales; 10 / 8 supralabials, 8 / 8 sublabials; nares in contact with rostral, first supralabial and 3 / 4 nasals; nasorostrals (see Rösler 1995, 20 p.) between 2.5 times larger than supranasals; one internasal, half as large as nasorostrals; snout scales medially granular, flattened in the preorbital region, smooth, cycloid, juxtaposed, contacting with supralabials 2–3 times larger than median snout scales; upper ciliaries anteriorly 2–3 times larger than posterior ciliaries; head scales granular, half as large as median snout scales; head centre and temporal region with tubercles; head tubercles rounded, flat, twice the size of the surrounding granules; mental in part destroyed (presumably triangular), as large as rostral scale; two postmentals, trapezoidal, longer than wide, each contacts seven gular scales; gular scales granular, the granule being as large as median snout scales; dorsals granular, as large as median snout scales; dorsal tubercles round, conical, three times as large as dorsals, surrounded approximately by ten dorsal scales, and arranged in 20 irregular longitudinal rows; ventrals flat, smooth, those medially twice the size of dorsal scales, in 48 longitudinal rows at midbody; upper and lower arm dorsally granular, lower arm with rounded, flat tubercles that are 1.5– 2 times larger than surrounding scales; upper and lower leg dorsally granular with scattered round, conical tubercles, three times as large as surrounding scales; femoral region medially sharply subdivided into large anterior and small posterior scales (see Fig. 2); uninterrupted series of enlarged subdigital lamellae below first finger 10 / 10, below fourth finger 17 / 18, below first toe 11 / 11, and below fourth toe 21 / 20; second, third and fourth digits with narrow skin seams; claws surrounded by a small dorsal and a large ventral scale; nine precloacal pores in a rightangled row, 26 enlarged precloacal scales; 3 / 3 nearly equal-sized postanal tubercles, arranged in an oblique row; original tail with whorls; dorsal tail scales flat, smooth, subimbricate, twice the size of median snout scales, arranged in regular transverse rows; the third tail whorl with nine scale rows; no enlarged subcaudal plates; subcaudals flat, smooth, imbricate, 2–3 times larger than dorsal tail scales, four rows per whorl, each of the last two per whorl enlarged; tail tubercles round, flat, 2 –2.5 times the size of the surrounding scales, the first whorl with six and the fifth whorl with four tubercles; regenerated tail dorsally and ventrally with flat, smooth, imbricate scales. The dorsum of the ethanol-preserved holotype is brownish-olive; labials brown with white blotches; head above with rounded, arched and ornate brown blotches dorsally; nuchal band triangular, dark violet brown, with white margins and with a wide stripe extending from the outermost neck band corner to the posterior margin of each eye (this band is often referred to as the nuchal loop); dorsum with four dark violet-brown, narrow buff margined transverse undulate bands; the anterior dorsal band located behind the axilla, the posterior dorsal band located in the sacral region; small to larger dark violet-brown irregular blotches with narrow buff margins between the dorsal bands; flanks greyish-brown with buff blotches; venter greyish-brown; jaws and throat with white stripes and blotches; precloacal region dirty white; limbs, including fingers and toes, with white and brown stripes; original tail with white and dark brown rings; regenerated tail brown, with white blotches on the ventral side and scarcely visible white blotches on the dorsum. For the coloration and pattern in life see Fig. 1. Paratypes. VNUH 7.7.0 6 (adult male) and ZFMK 86038 (adult female), Phong Nha - Ke Bang National Park, Quang Binh province, central-Vietnam, collected by Dang Ngoc Kien on 7 July 2006 in the limestone forest of U Bo at an altitude of ca. 520 m. VNUH 17.7.0 6 and ZFMK 86039 (adult females), Phong Nha - Ke Bang National Park, Quang Binh province, Central Vietnam, collected in the limestone forest of Cha Noi (35 km from the type locality) at an altitude of 300 to 400 m: VNUH 17.7.0 6 collected by Astrid Heidrich on 5 August 2006, and ZFMK 86039 by Ralf Hendrix on 7 August 2006. Variation of paratypes. The single male paratype differs from the pattern of the male holotype in having only three dark transverse body bands. Its venter is whitish-grey and the tail bears ten dark and ten light alternating bands. The female paratypes have 4–5 dark transverse body bands with yellow margins, greyish-brown to whitish-grey venters and 10–11 dark brown bands on the tail. The measurements and pholidosis of the paratype series are presented in Table 1. In addition, the female ZFMK 86038 had the postmentals in contact each with eight scales, and the dorsal tubercles surrounded by 9–11 dorsal scales. Diagnosis. A medium-sized Cyrtodactylus with a slender habitus and a maximum total length of 176.6 mm (SVL 62.5–90.8 mm) that can be distinguished from all congeners on the basis of the following combination of characters: 1) rounded body in cross-section, not wider than head; 2) neck band, extending to posterior margin of eyes; 3) dorsum with 3–5 dark transverse bands with yellow margins and dark spots; 4) ventrolateral skin folds along the body or enlarged lateral tubercles absent; 5) tubercles present on top of head, body, forearm, hind limbs and tail; 6) 19–20 irregular longitudinal rows of dorsal tubercles; 7) 47–50 longitudinal rows of ventral scales at midbody; 8) segmented tail with whorls, not depressed, base not enlarged; 9) 0–3 cloacal spurs on each side of tail base; 10) 9–11 precloacal pores in angular series in males and 16–27 enlarged precloacal scales in both sexes; 11) enlarged femoral scales and femoral pores absent; 12) precloacal groove absent; 13) subcaudals small, not transversally enlarged; 14) uninterrupted series of 20–23 lamellae beneath 4 th toe; 15) tail and limbs banded. Comparisons. Cyrtodactylus cryptus sp. n. can be distinguished from its Vietnamese congeners as follows (according to Taylor 1962, 1963, Smith 1973, Ziegler et al. 2002, Ngo & Grismer 2006, Youmans & Grismer 2006, Vu et al. in press): a higher number of precloacal pores (9–11 versus 4–7) and the absence of enlarged femoral scales distinguish it from C. condorensis (Smith, 1920); the absence of enlarged subcaudal plates, enlarged femoral scales and femoral pores distinguish it from C. intermedius (Smith, 1917), C. phongnhakebangensis Ziegler et al. 2002 and C. variegatus (Blyth, 1859); a higher number of precloacal pores (9– 11 versus 5–7 and 4, respectively) and the absence of femoral pores and enlarged femoral scales distinguish it from C. irregularis (Smith, 1921) and C. quadrivirgatus Taylor, 1962; the presence of preanal pores and a higher number of ventrals (47–50 versus 30–34) distinguish it from C. paradoxus Darevsky & Szczerbak, 1997. Cyrtodactylus cryptus sp. n. may be distinguished from all other congeners from China, Laos, Cambodia, Myanmar, Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia and the Philippines (according to Wermuth 1965) on the basis of the following characters: in the absence of transversely enlarged subcaudal plates it differs from C. aequalis Bauer, 2003, C. annandalei Bauer, 2003, C. aurensis Grismer, 2005, C. baluensis (Mocquard, 1890), C. chanhomeae Bauer et al., 2003, C. consobrinus (Peters, 1871), C. feae (Boulenger, 1893), C. ingeri Hikida, 1990, C. jarujini Ulber, 1993, C. malayanus (de Roij, 1915), C. oldhami (Theobald, 1876), C. peguensis (Boulenger, 1893), C. russelli Bauer, 2003 and C. sumonthai Bauer et al., 2002 (according to de Rooij 1915, Smith 1973, Sharma 2002, Grismer 2005, Grismer & Tzi Ming Leong 2005, Youmans & Grismer 2006). In lacking a precloacal groove the new species differs from C. cavernicolus Inger & King, 1961, C. fumosus (Müller, 1895), C. gansi Bauer, 2003, C. marmoratus (Kuhl, 1831), C. philippinicus (Steindachner, 1867), C. pubisulcus Inger, 1957, C. pulchellus (Grey, 1827), C. semenanjungensis Grismer & Tzi Ming Leong, 2005, and C. tiomanensis (Amaral 1935) (according to de Roij 1915, Taylor 1963, Grismer & Tzi Ming Leong 2005, Youmans & Grismer 2006). In the absence of femoral pores and / or enlarged femoral scales C. cryptus sp. n. differs from C. agusanensis (Taylor, 1915), C. angularis (Smith, 1921), C. brevipalmatus (Smith, 1923), C. darmandvillei (Weber, 1890), C. interdigitalis Stuart, 1999, C. papilionoides Ulber & Grossmann, 1991, C. redimiculus King, 1962, C. seribuatensis Youmans & Grismer, 2006, C. slowinskii Bauer, 2002, C. tigroides Bauer et al., 2003 and C. wetariensis (Dunn, 1927) (after de Rooij 1915, King 1962, Sharma 2002, Smith 1973, Taylor 1963, Ulber 1993, Ulber & Grossmann 1991, Batuwita & Bahir 2005, David et al. 2004, Youmans & Grismer 2006). In number of precloacal pores and / or preanal scales it differs from C. annulatus (Taylor, 1915), C. ayeyarwadyensis Bauer, 2003, C. chrysopylos Bauer, 2003, C. jellesmae (Boulenger 1897), C. laevigatus Darevsky, 1964, C. matsuii Hikida, 1990, C. thirakhupti Pauwels et al., 2004, and C. yoshii Hikida, 1990 (de Rooij 1915, Hikida 1990, Batuwita & Bahir 2005, Youmans & Grismer 2006): C. annulatus has 4–6 precloacal pores versus 9–11 in Cyrtodactylus cryptus sp. n.; C. ayeyarwadyensis has a higher number of precloacal pores (16–29); C. chrysopylos, C. matsuii and C. yoshii have no enlarged precloacal scales versus 16–27 in the new species; C. jellesmae, C. laevigatus and C. thirakhupti have no precloacal pores versus 9–11 in the new species. The new species differs from C. buchardi David et al., 2004 in the neckband reaching the posterior margin of the eyes, the higher lamellar count under 4 th toe (20–23 versus 12), and the lower number of dorsal tubercles (19–20 versus 25) (David et al. 2004); it differs from C. brevidactylus Bauer, 2002 in having a higher number of subdigital lamellae below 4 th toe (20–23 versus 11) and by the presence of bands and stripes on body (Youmans & Grismer 2006); it differs from C. elok Dring, 1979 in having a higher number of subdigital lamellae under 4 th toe (20–23 versus 18–19), in a higher number of precloacal pores (9– 11 versus 8), a higher number of ventrals (47–50 versus 44) and by the presence of bands on body (Dring 1979, Youmans & Grismer 2006); it differs from C. lateralis (Werner, 1896) in a lower number of ventrals (47–50 versus 60–64), by the absence of lateral folds and the presence of body bands (de Rooij 1915); and it differs from C. wakeorum Bauer, 2003 in having a higher ventral count (47–50 versus 31), a higher subdigital lamellar count under the 4 th toe (20–23 versus 10) and the presence of tubercles on forelimbs (Youmans & Grismer 2006). C. cryptus sp. n. is further distinguishable from all other congeners from India, Sri Lanka, as well as from Australia, New Guinea and the Solomon Islands (according to Wermuth 1965) on the basis of the following characters: the absence of enlarged subcaudal scales from C. aaroni Günther & Rösler, 2002, C. consobrinoides (Annandale, 1905), C. fraenatus (Günter, 1864), C. khasiensis (Jerdon, 1870), C. louisiadensis (de Vis, 1892), C. murua Kraus & Allison, 2006 and C. ramboda Batuwita & Bahir, 2005 (de Rooij 1915, Sharma 2002, Batuwita & Bahir 2005, Kraus & Allison 2006); the absence of femoral pores and enlarged femoral scales from C. biordinis Brown & McCoy, 1980, C. deveti (Brongersma, 1948), C. gubernatoris (Annandale, 1913), C. loriae (Boulenger, 1898), C. malcomsmithi (Constable, 1949), C. mimikanus (Boulenger, 1914), C. novaeguineae (Schlegel, 1837), C. sadleiri Wells & Wellington, 1985, C. soba Batuwita & Bahir, 2005, C. subsolanus Batuwita & Bahir, 2005 and C. sworderi (Smith, 1925) (Batuwita & Bahir 2005, de Rooij 1915, Sharma 2002, Youmans & Grismer 2006); the presence or a higher number of precloacal pores from C. cracens Batuwita & Bahir, 2005, that has 5–6 versus 9–11 precloacal pores in the new species, from C. edwardtaylori Batuwita & Bahir, 2005, that has 6 versus 9–11 precloacal pores in the new species, and from C. sermowaiensis (de Rooij, 1915) that has no precloacal pores (Batuwita & Bahir 2005); the absence of a precloacal groove from C. papuensis (Brongersma, 1934) and C. rubidus (Blyth, 1861) (Batuwita & Bahir 2005); by a higher number of dorsal tubercle rows from C. adleri Das, 1997, that has 11 versus 19–20 in the new species (Das 1997); by a distinct pattern from C. derongo Brown & Parker, 1973, that has a dark reddish brown dorsum with 9–10 very faint series of darker blotches each enclosing two to several large white tubercles (Brown & Parker 1973). Further records. During field research within Phong Nha - Ke Bang National Park from July to August 2006, 14 additional specimens of C. cryptus sp. n. were collected by Dang Ngoc Kien, Astrid Heidrich, Ralf Hendrix and local people. They were identified, sexed, weighed and measured before their subsequent release (see Table 2). The male specimens that were captured on 6 and 10 August 2006 had 11 precloacal pores. Some sexual dimorphism in the coloration of the ventral surfaces was observed (females were somewhat darker). Coloration and pattern in two captured juveniles did not differ from that of adult specimens. In two specimens the transverse body bands were fragmented into large, broad blotches (Fig. 4). . Etymology. The name of the species derives from the Greek adjective kryptos (Latin cryptus) meaning “concealed”, “hidden”, because the new species had been overlooked during the previous decade of herpetological investigations in the Phong Nha - Ke Bang National Park. Natural history and distribution. All observations of Cyrtodactylus cryptus sp. n. took place at night. Specimens were found on karst cliffs, on tree trunks and in branches or leaves up to 2 m height, but also on rotten trees, on stones and one specimen even on the ground on a forest street. For climate and microhabitat information see Table 3. In the U Bo region, C. cryptus sp. n. was the only bent-toed gecko we were able to record and the new species inhabited both karst cliffs and tree trunks (Figs. 6–7). In the second site of the Phong Nha - Ke Bang National Park, where we recorded the new species (in Cha Noi area, Fig. 8), C. cryptus sp. n. occurred in sympatry with C. phongnhakebangensis. According to our observations it seems that these two species inhabit different microhabitats when occurring together, with C. cryptus sp. n. mainly occupying tree trunks and C. phongnhakebangensis karst cliffs. In the U Bo area we marked eight individuals of the new species along 138 m of karst stream. After three weeks, three animals (37.5 %) were recaptured up to 5 m away from the original collecting locations. However, similar studies carried out in the primary forest gave different results: A male and a female were released on a tree trunk distant from streams and karst cliffs, and recaptured during the subsequent two nights. However, we failed to see these animals during searches conducted ten days later. During capture-recapture studies we only were able to recapture C. cryptus sp. n. on karst cliffs, but never on primary forest trees. Detailed data concerning capture-recapture research and the feeding ecology of C. cryptus sp. n. will be published elsewhere (Heidrich et al., in prep.). One female specimen, kept in a terrarium for some time laid two hard-shelled, oval eggs of 12 x 14.3 mm size on 28 September, 2006, in the early rainy season. Both eggs were deposited in a tube-shaped stone hole. Currently, the species is known only from its type locality (Fig. 9). Systematic position. Among the species of Cyrtodactylus distributed in South East Asia, C. cryptus sp. n. is mainly characterised by the absence of enlarged subcaudals, a precloacal groove, femoral pores and enlarged femoral scales. The new species is superficially similar in colouration and pattern to the sympatric C. phongnhakebangensis. However, C. cryptus sp. n. is clearly set apart from C. phongnhakebangensis among others by lacking enlarged subcaudal plates, femoral pores and enlarged femoral scales, as well as by a lower number of precloacal pores. C. cryptus sp. n. is very similar to C. papilionoides in habitus, body size and colour pattern (Ulber & Grossmann 1991, Chan-Ard et al. 1999), but differs in the presence of round and flat tail tubercles versus pointed tail tubercles in C. papilionoides, the lack of enlarged femoral scales, a higher number of ventral scales (47–50 versus 30–34 in C. papilionoides), the presence of a continuous series of 20– 23 subdigital lamellae under the 4 th toe versus an interrupted series of 12–16 lamellae under the 4 th toe and 3– 7 scales, a higher number of longitudinal rows of dorsal tubercles (19–20 irregular versus 12–14 regular) and precloacal pores (9–11 versus 4–6), which are arranged in acute-angled rows (versus obtused-angled rows in C. papilionoides), as well as by having larger precloacal scales (compared with ventral and femoral scales). Furthermore, the two species have different egg shapes (oval in C. cryptus, almost round in C. papilionoides, with a diameter of 14.9 x 14.0 mm according to Schäfer 1991). Future (molecular) analyses must clarify the systematic relationships of the new species.