top of page
Cuckoo wasp strip.jpg

Open-access, online, rapid taxonomy
ISSN: 2653-4649 (Online)

Australian Journal of 

TaxonomyAustralia_logo_color_no_text.png

Taxonomy

Thank you for reviewing this taxon in Australian Journal of Taxonomy.

As you know, peer review is a critical step in ensuring high quality and scientific rigour in taxonomy. Reviews for Australian Journal of Taxonomy are performed fully online.

 

Reviews for Australian Journal of Taxonomy are performed fully online. If you wish to add a review comment for a section, click the Comment button at the bottom of the section. Feel free to copy and paste text from the manuscript into your comment, to highlight suggested edits.

 

Once complete, check the My review is now ready to submit box, then click the Submit button.

If this is the first time you've reviewed a paper for Australian Journal of Taxonomy, or if your last review was done some time ago, please click the More button to read some brief instructions.

More...

Reviewing for Australian Journal of Taxonomy may be slightly different from reviewing for other more conventional journals. Australian Journal of Taxonomy specialises in papers describing new taxa in as straightforward a manner as possible. It forms part of a strategy to accelerate the documentation of Australia's species. While as a reviewer you are asked to draw attention to inaccuracies, ambiguities and errors in this paper, please ensure that your review focuses on ensuring adequacy of content rather than demanding unreasonable levels of detail.

Australian Journal of Taxonomy is also a lightly styled journal. This means there is no highly prescriptive journal style to which authors must conform. Rather, authors are expected to be consistent within a paper, reasonable, and moderately conventional in their styling and formatting. Within these bounds, Australian Journal of Taxonomy allows considerable latitude. Please look for and point out to the author anything that creates ambiguity or reduces clarity, but do not ask for formatting changes that achieve nothing more than consistency for its own sake.

Note that as a reviewer of this paper you will be acknowledged directly in the published paper, unless you choose to remain anonymous.

Thanks again for agreeing to review. We appreciate your time and expertise.

THIS IS A REVIEW COPY OF AN UNPUBLISHED MANUSCRIPT. PLEASE DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OR SHARE

Please Wait...

throbber_13.gif

Taxon name

Eremiascincus erebos sp. nov.

Comment

Figure citations

Comment

Registration Number

To be registered upon acceptance.

Comment

Type statement

Holotype: MAGNT R36326, Pungalina–Seven Emu Wildlife Sanctuary (16.465°S, 137.553°E), Northern Territory, collected during baseline fauna surveys by R. Lloyd, J. Kanowski, J. Middleton, E. Mulder & R. Jensen on 25th June 2010.

 

Paratypes: MAGNT R36327, collection details as for holotype; AMS R54808, collected from “the vicinity of Caranbirini waterhole”, Northern Territory (ca. 16.275°S, 136.079°E).

Comment

Synonymy

Comment

Diagnosis

Diagnosis. Differentiated from all other Eremiascincus by the following combination of characters: irregular, dark, transverse bands on dorsal surface of body and original tail; dark bands on torso 1–2.5 scales wide; 8–9 supralabials, the penultimate and/or posteriormost being divided horizontally; ear opening very large and elliptical; scales on dorsal surface of fourth toe arranged in multiple rows with oblique sutures, with only the terminal and penultimate scale row single; dorsum and tail completely lacking longitudinal ridges; snout rounded in lateral view, not depressed.

 

Etymology: From the Greek ἔρεβος (erebos), meaning “deep darkness” and the name of the primordial spirit of darkness, in reference to the crevice‑ and cave‑dwelling habits of this crepuscular and nocturnal species. The epithet was intentionally chosen for its phonetic resemblance to the generic name Eremiascincus—despite deriving from a different Greek root—creating a deliberate pairing, with both names beginning in ere. The name is used as a noun in apposition.

Comment

Description

Description of type series. All raw measurements and scale counts are presented in Table 2; traits not given therein are described below.

General dimension and proportions. A large, robust Eremiascincus. Head relatively large (21–23% of snout–vent length), deep (depth 49–50% of head length), wide (width 70–78% of head length); snout relatively short (38–40% of head length), bluntly rounded; ventral edge of rostral forms obtuse point in lateral view; dorsal snout profile slightly convex, not depressed; canthus rostralis rounded; lower eyelid movable, scaly; ear opening very large (height 33–34% of head depth; length 11–12% of head length), vertically elliptic, somewhat rectangular, bordered by small granular scales; tympanum visible; neck thick, scarcely distinct from head. Limbs pentadactyl, overlapping when adpressed; digits rounded in cross-section; fourth toe longest. Tail thick, smooth, round in cross-section; no ridges or keels on dorsal surface of hindbody or tail; length of fully original tails unknown.

Scalation. Nasals widely separated; frontal elongate, arrowhead-shaped, much larger than prefrontals; prefrontals widely separated; frontal contacting frontonasal; frontoparietals paired; interparietal free, smaller than frontoparietals; parietals large, in contact posterior to interparietal, each bordered posteriorly by upper secondary temporal and enlarged nuchals, sometimes also by unenlarged paravertebral scales; 2nd and 3rd supraoculars usually widest (3rd and 4th widest on right side of AMS R54808); 2–3 supraoculars contacting frontal; supraciliaries 9–11, 1st usually largest (2nd largest on left side of AMS R54808; last largest on left side of holotype MAGNT R36326); 1st supraciliary on left side of AMS R54808 divided horizontally, producing enlarged upper (2nd) supraciliary; loreals 2; in AMS R54808 lower lateral portion of frontonasal or upper portion of 1st loreal divided horizontally, forming narrow intervening scale; supranasals absent; nasal groove posterior to naris present on right side of AMS R54808 but otherwise absent; preoculars 2, lower larger than upper; presuboculars 2–3; posteriormost and sometimes penultimate supralabial divided horizontally; upper half of posteriormost supralabial overlapping lower secondary temporal; subinfralabial scales (between chin shields and infralabials) present in holotype MAGNT R36326 but absent in others; temporals one primary and two secondary (upper and lower); distal 4–7 subdigital lamellae on 4th toe single (7 in holotype MAGNT R36326), remainder divided medially; lamellae callose, each single lamella bearing one callus, calli strongest proximally, sometimes appearing keeled rather than callose distally; supradigital scales on 4th toe in multiple rows with oblique sutures, except distalmost (adjoining claw) and penultimate scale rows single; plantar scales rounded to weakly callose; median precloacal scales 2, distinctly enlarged.

Colour-pattern in preservative. Ground colour of dorsal and lateral surfaces pale yellow to yellow-brown, paling to cream on flanks; dorsal pattern of dark brown to blackish latitudinal crossbands, 1–2.5 scales wide, on neck, body, and original tail; anteriormost nuchal band broken medially; torso bands usually oblique and irregular rather than strictly transverse, descending anteriorly on lateral surfaces and often bifurcating toward flanks; bands on dorsum of holotype MAGNT R36326 most regular (Fig. 2), with all but anteriormost unbroken and of largely consistent width; other specimens characterised by more broken and irregular banding (Fig. 2); pale interspaces with diffuse stippling, most intense mid-dorsally, becoming more diffuse laterally; dorsal and lateral surfaces of head with extensive diffuse stippling and mottling, giving head an overall darker appearance than body ground colour; ventral surfaces cream, largely immaculate, with diffuse stippling and/or mottling near flank margins and on lower lateral surfaces of neck and head.

 

Colouration in life (Figs 3A–3C, 3E, 5A). Based on both type series (n = 3) and unvouchered photographed individuals (n = 3): Overall similar to colouration in preservative, but generally more vivid and variable; yellows more intense, pale ventral surfaces closer to ivory than cream. Ground colour of lower lateral surfaces and limbs often greyish in appearance, typically due to fine stippling. Ground colour darkest mid-dorsum, reflecting denser dark stippling, with colour becoming brighter on upper lateral surfaces where stippling is reduced, grading to grey on flanks and to ivory ventrally. One photographed individual (Fig. 5A) exhibited a browner ground colour rather than yellow, with dark bands of reduced contrast relative to other individuals.

 

Supplementary observations from unvouchered individuals. Photographs of two unvouchered individuals permit limited assessment of diagnostic characters—other than colouration in life, already given above—relative to the type series. One individual (SMZ371; Fig. 3C) bears eight supralabials on each side, with both the penultimate and posteriormost scales horizontally divided; the second individual (Fig. 5A) bears nine supralabials on each side, with the posteriormost divided on the left and both the penultimate and posteriormost divided on the right. Both individuals exhibit very large ear openings and entirely lack raised dorsal ridges on the posterior body and tail. In both individuals, the supradigital scales on the fourth toe are arranged in multiple rows with oblique sutures, with the distalmost (adjoining the claw) and penultimate rows single. These observations are consistent with the type series, thus corroborating several diagnostic traits given above. In contrast, SMZ371 possesses a single median chin scale, rather than the two median chin shields observed in the type series, indicating some intraspecific variation in this character.

Comment

Specimens Examined

Comment

Notes

Comparison with Australian congeners: Eremiascincus erebos sp. nov. differs most obviously from E. musivus, E. pardalis, E. isolepis, E. douglasi, and E. brongersmai in its distinctive colour-pattern consisting of irregular, transverse dark bands. Its rounded snout, very large ear opening, and 8–9 supralabials further distinguish it from all congeners except E. richardsonii and E. fasciolatus. From E. richardsonii, it differs in having at least the posteriormost supralabial divided and multiple scale rows across the dorsal surface of the fourth toe. From E. fasciolatus, it differs in lacking longitudinal ridges along the dorsal surface of the hindbody and tail, and in possessing a higher MBSR count and two medial chin shields (noting, however, the small sample size)[SZ1] . Eremiascincus erebos sp. nov. further differs from both E. richardsonii and E. fasciolatus in its larger ear opening. As in E. richardsonii, the tail bands may be slightly oblique rather than perfectly transverse—a feature contrasting with E. pallidus, E. intermedius, and E. phantasmus.

 

Distribution and habitat. This species is currently known from two localities in the north-eastern Northern Territory: Caranbrini Conservation Reserve and Pungalina–Seven Emu Sanctuary. These records span two adjacent IBRA bioregions (DCCEEW 2025), with Caranbirini Conservation Reserve occurring within the Gulf Fall and Uplands Bioregion, and Pungalina–Seven Emu Sanctuary within the Gulf Coastal Bioregion. Given the continuity of suitable sandstone habitats across the southern Gulf of Carpentaria region, the species is likely to be more widespread than currently documented.

Caranbirini Conservation Reserve lies within the Borroloola area, at the western edge of the Bukalara Range (McArthur River sandstone escarpment). At this locality, the species has been recorded from "ruiniform" sandstone rock towers and gorges, with most individuals observed in deep, narrow crevices and caves (SMZ & EB pers. obs.). One individual has been observed active in litter between boulders near the base of a rock tower (S. Mahony pers. comm.). Caranbirini, and the Bukalara Range more broadly, is characterised by Proterozoic sandstone-dominated geology of the McArthur Basin (Roper Group), forming rocky plateaux, dissected ridges, and steep escarpments with extensive skeletal substrates (Wilson et al. 1990; Parks and Wildlife Commission of the Northern Territory 2000; Harrison et al., 2009). Vegetation at Caranbirini comprises a mosaic of mapped units (VMU 10, 14, 15, & 24; Cuff et al. 2009), broadly consisting of mid- to tall open woodland dominated by Eucalyptus leucophloia, E. tectifica, E. miniata and E. tetradonta, often with Corymbia dichromophloia and a grassy or spinifex (Triodia spp.) understorey.

At Pungalina–Seven Emu Sanctuary, individuals were recorded from a sandstone scree slope on the edge of a deep rocky gorge within a sandstone escarpment west of the Calvert River. The gorge is set within a series of small, dry sandstone plateaux characterised by small cliffs at the crest, extending downward as large scree slopes and merging into a drainage line at the base. These habitats support comparable open woodland communities dominated by Corymbia dichromophloia, Eucalyptus miniata, and E. tetradonta, with a Triodia pungens understorey and more complex assemblages on escarpments and slopes.

While specimens and observations are few, the species appears restricted to complex rocky habitats and has not been recorded from adjacent woodland or riparian habitats. This strong microhabitat association may explain why so few animals have been recorded, and suggests that targeted searches of suitable rocky habitat might find the species in many more places.

Comment
NAT image.png
Comment
NAT image.png
Comment
NAT image.png
Comment
NAT image.png
Comment
NAT image.png
Comment

Table content

Key content

Comment

General Review comments on this taxon

For author(s)

For editors

Save

Please wait...

bottom of page