FrogEyes
Active member
One of the big sources of confusion was an error in one of the recent genetic studies. P.guanxiensis was found to be closely related to P.deloustali because the specimens of the latter were misidentified. They were not topotypic, but were in actuality from northeastern Cao Bang province. Topotypic [Vinh Phuc province] specimens were used in other studies, in which they did NOT come out closest to P.guanxiensis. In other words, two different species were used in comparison. That means the northeastern Cao Bang animals are not P.deloustali, but they might not be P.guanxiensis either. In other parts of Cao Bang, "true" P.deloustali occurs, though more extensive genotyping is needed, given that Paramesotriton is now known from most provinces of northern Vietnam east of the Red River. Given the current records, it would not be surprising to find P.deloustali in Yunnan and Guangxi, nor to find P.guanxiensis marginally in northeastern Vietnam. There is a large gap in Guangxi and Guangdong between these two and their closest relatives, P.yunwuensis and P.fuzhongensis, which suggests either greater distributions or more species of the complex remain to be discovered.
FYI, there appear to be errors in the maps of Stuart & Papenfuss 2002, and in Wu et al 2009, which I will be asking the authors about.