FrogEyes
Active member
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2010
- Messages
- 908
- Reaction score
- 41
- Points
- 28
- Location
- Southern Minnesota
- Country
- Canada
Pursuant to this thread:
http://www.caudata.org/forum/f1173-...achytriton-osteology-taxonomy.html#post340820
which became outdated before I posted it...
Yunke WU, Yuezhao WANG, James HANKEN, 2012. New species of Pachytriton (Caudata: Salamandridae) from the Nanling Mountain Range, southeastern China. Zootaxa 3388: 1-16.
http://www.mapress.com/zootaxa/2012/f/z03388p016f.pdf
This paper reports that a population from Mangshan, and belonging to the P.brevipes complex, corresponds to Pachytriton "B" and is a distinct species by both morphological and genetic data, now named Pachytriton xanthospilos. While this species is morphologically distinct, I do not yet have the paper and can't confirm whether other species are also distinguishable. However, unlike the osteology paper published only a few weeks ago, this paper treats all currently named forms as valid species, dividing the P.brevipes complex into four species. I also don't know yet if the new species corresponds to any of the distinctive genetic forms which lacked names but were identified in previous studies [viz - lineage 1d of Nishikawa et al 2011].
http://www.caudata.org/forum/f1173-...achytriton-osteology-taxonomy.html#post340820
which became outdated before I posted it...
Yunke WU, Yuezhao WANG, James HANKEN, 2012. New species of Pachytriton (Caudata: Salamandridae) from the Nanling Mountain Range, southeastern China. Zootaxa 3388: 1-16.
http://www.mapress.com/zootaxa/2012/f/z03388p016f.pdf
This paper reports that a population from Mangshan, and belonging to the P.brevipes complex, corresponds to Pachytriton "B" and is a distinct species by both morphological and genetic data, now named Pachytriton xanthospilos. While this species is morphologically distinct, I do not yet have the paper and can't confirm whether other species are also distinguishable. However, unlike the osteology paper published only a few weeks ago, this paper treats all currently named forms as valid species, dividing the P.brevipes complex into four species. I also don't know yet if the new species corresponds to any of the distinctive genetic forms which lacked names but were identified in previous studies [viz - lineage 1d of Nishikawa et al 2011].