Research Article |
|
Corresponding author: Werner Conradie ( werner@bayworld.co.za ) Academic editor: Uwe Fritz
© 2025 Werner Conradie, Chad Keates, Eli Greenbaum, Javier Lobón-Rovira, Krystal A. Tolley, Max Benito, Pedro Vaz Pinto, Reuben V. van Breda, Luke Verburgt.
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Citation:
Conradie W, Keates C, Greenbaum E, Lobón-Rovira J, Tolley KA, Benito M, Vaz Pinto P, van Breda RV, Verburgt L (2025) Systematics of African rough-scaled lizards, with description of two new species from eastern Angola (Squamata: Lacertidae: Ichnotropis Peters, 1854). Vertebrate Zoology 75: 627-672. https://doi.org/10.3897/vz.75.e167366
|
Abstract
Ichnotropis is a genus of medium-sized lacertids endemic to sub-Saharan Africa, characterised by rough head shields. The genus currently comprises six nominal species distributed across much of southern, central, and eastern Africa. Some species are apparently active at only certain times of the year, resulting in limited specimen collections and severely hampering research. This scarcity of material has historically made comprehensive systematic reviews of the genus difficult and has led to the description of numerous regional morphological variants as distinct species or subspecies. Material collected in recent years has enabled us to provide a new phylogenetic hypothesis of Ichnotropis using two mitochondrial genes (16S and ND4) and two nuclear genes (c-mos and RAG-1). Our phylogenetic dataset includes 56 individuals representing five of the six currently recognised species (excluding I. chapini). Additionally, the broad geographical sampling of the widespread I. capensis group has allowed us to explore the taxonomic status of several species and subspecies within the group. As a result, we demonstrate the monophyly of Ichnotropis in relation to other African lacertids and present the most comprehensive phylogeny of the genus to date. We also provide the first phylogenetic placements for I. tanganicana and I. grandiceps, which allows us to validate their taxonomic statuses. Furthermore, we recovered a new cryptic species closely related to I. grandiceps, and identified several well-supported clades within the I. capensis group, all corroborated by multi-locus species delimitation analyses. One of these clades is described herein as a new species, while the remaining taxa of interest are discussed and highlighted for future investigation. Based on our findings, we recommend the following taxonomic revisions: Ichnotropis longipes and I. macrolepidota should remain synonyms of I. capensis; I. bivittata pallida and I. capensis nigrescens are treated as a junior synonyms of I. bivittata; and I. overlaeti is considered a junior synonym of I. tanganicana. Although we could not determine the phylogenetic placement of I. chapini due to the lack of genetic material, its head morphology and scalation support its reassignment to the I. bivittata group. Thus, it is retained as a valid species pending the availability of new material for further taxonomic actions. In conclusion, this study resolves several long-standing taxonomic issues within one of Africa’s most understudied lacertid genera and lays a solid foundation for future research on the genus Ichnotropis.
Africa, cryptic species, reptiles, sub-Sahara, taxonomy
The family Lacertidae comprises 388 recognised species and numerous subspecies distributed across Africa, Europe, and Asia (
In recent years, several phylogenetic studies have attempted to address this gap by focussing on central and southern African lacertid genera, including Adolfus (
The African lacertid genus Ichnotropis Peters, 1854 comprises several small to medium-sized, rough-scaled, terrestrial species that inhabit mesic to xeric savannas in central and southern Africa (
Knowledge of the genus is based largely on the work of
In recent years, collections of Ichnotropis across its range have improved, particularly due to a concerted effort to carry out biodiversity surveys in under-sampled regions such as Angola (
Over the past decade, multiple new Ichnotropis specimens were collected across central and southern Africa, especially from Angola, Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), Mozambique, South Africa and Zambia (Table
Material used for the phylogenetic analyses, including sample number, museum catalogue number, country, locality, geographic coordinates, and GenBank/ENA accession numbers. Abbreviations: Aaron M. Bauer field numbers (AMB), British Museum of Natural History (
| Sample No. | Museum catalogue No. | Species | Country | Locality | Latitude | Longitude | 16S | ND4 | RAG-1 | c-mos |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| WC-4515 |
|
Ichnotropis b. bivittata | Angola | West of Cuito town on Aludungo road | −12.3278 | 16.9067 | PV357721 | OZ347967 | PV412867 | |
| NB0675 | CHL0675 | Ichnotropis b. bivittata | Angola | Luando Integral Nature Reserve | −10.2772 | 16.9533 | PV357719 | PV412839 | PV412865 | PV390641 |
| P1-318 | FKH-0833 | Ichnotropis b. bivittata | Angola | Cambau | −10.1048 | 15.2182 | PV357720 | PV412840 | PV412866 | PV390642 |
| KTH09-075 |
|
Ichnotropis b. pallida | Angola | 7 km East of Humpata | −14.9820 | 13.4352 | HF547775 | HF547731 | HF547694 | |
| ABC2 | NA | Ichnotropis capensis | Namibia | Katima Mulilo | −17.5066 | 24.2688 | JX962898 | JX963023 | JX962916 | |
| AMB-6001 |
|
Ichnotropis capensis | Namibia | Road to Tsumkwe | −19.4600 | 19.7200 | DQ871148 | HF547732 | DQ871206 | |
| AMB-6067 | CAS 209602 | Ichnotropis capensis | South Africa | Kosi Bay, KwaZulu-Natal | −26.9400 | 32.8200 | DQ871149 | HF547733 | DQ871207 | |
| ANG-311 |
|
Ichnotropis capensis | Angola | 8.5 km North of Rito | −16.6232 | 19.0535 | PV357725 | PV412844 | OZ347936 | |
|
|
|
Ichnotropis capensis | Zambia | Sioma Ngwezi National Park | −16.8987 | 23.5985 | MK464418 | |||
|
|
|
Ichnotropis capensis | Zambia | Chavuma Farm | −13.0701 | 22.9288 | MK464417 | |||
|
|
|
Ichnotropis capensis | Zambia | Lukwakwa | −12.6608 | 24.4370 | MK464416 | |||
|
|
|
Ichnotropis capensis | Zambia | Nanzila Plains, Kafue National Park | −16.2814 | 25.9168 | MK464415 | |||
| BOX23-C02 |
|
Ichnotropis capensis | South Africa | Tembe Elephant Park, KwaZulu-Natal | −27.0217 | 32.4583 | OZ347416 | OZ347968 | ||
| EI-0437 | NA | Ichnotropis capensis | South Africa | Lepalale, Limpopo | −23.6391 | 27.5981 | OZ347969 | OZ347937 | OZ347957 | |
| EI-0443 |
|
Ichnotropis capensis | South Africa | Lepalale, Limpopo | −23.6391 | 27.5981 | OZ347970 | OZ347958 | ||
| EI-0444 |
|
Ichnotropis capensis | South Africa | Lepalale, Limpopo | −23.6391 | 27.5981 | OZ347417 | OZ347971 | OZ347938 | OZ347959 |
| L-18 |
|
Ichnotropis capensis | Angola | Gambos, Foster‘s farm | −15.8500 | 14.6833 | PV357726 | PV412845 | OZ347939 | |
| MOZ14-356 | NHNM | Ichnotropis capensis | Mozambique | Chizavane, Zona Braza Lodge | −25.0137 | 34.0376 | OZ347418 | OZ347972 | OZ347940 | |
| MOZ14-357 |
|
Ichnotropis capensis | Mozambique | Chizavane, Zona Braza Lodge | −25.0137 | 34.0376 | OZ347419 | OZ347973 | OZ347941 | |
| MOZ14-358 |
|
Ichnotropis capensis | Mozambique | Chizavane, Zona Braza Lodge | −25.0137 | 34.0376 | OZ347420 | OZ347974 | OZ347942 | OZ347960 |
| NB0771 | CHL0771 | Ichnotropis capensis | Angola | Bicuar National Park | −15.2435 | 14.8915 | PV357727 | PV412846 | PV412870 | PV390644 |
| NB0772 | CHL0772 | Ichnotropis capensis | Angola | Bicuar National Park | −15.2435 | 14.8915 | PV357728 | PV412847 | PV412871 | PV390644 |
| NB0779 | CHL0779 | Ichnotropis capensis | Angola | Bicuar National Park | −15.1049 | 14.8403 | PV357729 | PV412848 | PV412872 | PV390644 |
| NB1116 | CHL1116 | Ichnotropis capensis | Angola | Cusseque | −13.6851 | 17.0795 | PV357730 | PV412849 | OZ347943 | PV390647 |
| NB1123 | CHL1123 | Ichnotropis capensis | Angola | Cusseque | −13.6782 | 17.0832 | PV357732 | PV412851 | PV390649 | |
| NB1124 | CHL1124 | Ichnotropis capensis | Angola | Cusseque | −13.6782 | 17.0832 | PV357733 | PV412852 | ||
| NB1138 | CHL1138 | Ichnotropis capensis | Angola | Cusseque | −13.6782- | 17.0832 | PV357734 | |||
|
|
|
Ichnotropis capensis | Mozambique | 7 km North of Chibuto | −24.6231 | 33.5661 | OZ347975 | |||
| RE211206B1 |
|
Ichnotropis capensis | Namibia | Khaudum | −18.2876 | 20.9897 | OZ347421 | OZ347976 | OZ347944 | |
| RE211206B3 |
|
Ichnotropis capensis | Namibia | Khaudum | −18.2876 | 20.9897 | OZ347977 | OZ347945 | ||
| SK13128 | NA | Ichnotropis capensis | Namibia | Naye-Naye | −19.9235 | 20.6976 | MN015330 | MN030223 | ||
| WC-3660 |
|
Ichnotropis capensis | Zambia | Ngonye Falls | −16.6736 | 23.5969 | OZ347422 | OZ347978 | OZ347946 | OZ347961 |
| WC-6797 |
|
Ichnotropis capensis | Angola | Quembo River bridge camp | −13.5275 | 19.2806 | PV357731 | PV412850 | PV412873 | PV390648 |
| WC12-A191 |
|
Ichnotropis capensis | Angola | HALO Cuito Cuanavale office | −15.1392 | 19.1436 | PV357724 | PV412843 | OZ347947 | |
| WP031 | NA | Ichnotropis capensis | Namibia | 50 km North of Gobabis | −22.0000 | 19.1400 | HF547734 | HF547695 | ||
| WRB INH2 | NA | Ichnotropis capensis | Mozambique | Inhassoro | −21.7143 | 35.2103 | OZ347423 | OZ347979 | OZ347948 | |
| WC-4585 |
|
Ichnotropis capensis | Angola | Quembo River source | −13.1095 | 19.0061 | PV357722 | PV412841 | PV412868 | PV390643 |
| WC-4618 |
|
Ichnotropis capensis | Angola | Quembo River source | −13.1360 | 19.0453 | PV357723 | PV412842 | PV412869 | |
| RE211206D1 |
|
Ichnotropis grandiceps | Namibia | Khaudum | −18.2876 | 20.9897 | OZ347424 | OZ347980 | ||
| P3-059 | MHNCUP-REP 0983 | Ichnotropis longicorpa sp. nov. | Angola | Cuemba | −12.1707 | 18.2257 | PV357739 | PV412857 | OZ347962 | |
| P9-035 | MHNCUP-REP 0984 | Ichnotropis longicorpa sp. nov. | Angola | Mona Quimbundo | −10.0583 | 19.8056 | PV357737 | PV412855 | OZ347949 | OZ347963 |
| TB-44 |
|
Ichnotropis longicorpa sp. nov. | Angola | Camp Chiri, Miombo forest/camp | −9.3969 | 20.4319 | PV357735 | PV412853 | PV412874 | |
| TB-46 |
|
Ichnotropis longicorpa sp. nov. | Angola | Camp Chiri, Miombo forest/camp | −9.3969 | 20.4319 | PV357738 | PV412856 | PV412876 | |
| WC-4557 |
|
Ichnotropis longicorpa sp. nov. | Angola | Lungwebungu River camp bridge crossing | −12.5835 | 18.6660 | PV357741 | PV412859 | PV412877 | |
| WC-4560 |
|
Ichnotropis longicorpa sp. nov. | Angola | Sombanana village river | −12.3071 | 18.6235 | PV357736 | PV412854 | PV412875 | OZ347964 |
| WC-6291 |
|
Ichnotropis longicorpa sp. nov. | Angola | Lake Tchanssengwe | −12.4140 | 18.6442 | PV357740 | PV412858 | OZ347950 | |
| P0-44 | MHNCUP-REP 0983 | Ichnotropis microlepidota | Angola | Serra do Moco – Canjonde | −12.4261 | 15.1478 | PV357742 | PV412860 | PV412878 | PV390651 |
| WC-3969 |
|
Ichnotropis robusta sp. nov. | Angola | 4 km upstream from Cuanavale River source | −13.0508 | 18.8973 | PV357715 | PV412835 | PV412862 | PV390640 |
| WC-3994 |
|
Ichnotropis robusta sp. nov. | Angola | Cuanavale River source | −13.0903 | 18.8940 | PV357718 | PV412838 | PV412864 | |
| WC-4056 |
|
Ichnotropis robusta sp. nov. | Angola | drive to Cuanavale River Camp from Samanunga village | −13.0380 | 18.8298 | OZ347425 | OZ347981 | OZ347951 | |
| WC-4816 |
|
Ichnotropis robusta sp. nov. | Angola | Cuando River source | −13.0035 | 19.1275 | PV357716 | PV41283 | ||
| CKD-457 |
|
Ichnotropis tanganicana | DRC | Upemba National Park | −9.0442 | 26.9966 | OZ347426 | OZ347982 | OZ347952 | |
| CKD-432 |
|
Ichnotropis tanganicana | DRC | Upemba National Park | −9.0442 | 26.9966 | OZ347427 | OZ347983 | OZ347953 | OZ347965 |
| CKD-433 |
|
Ichnotropis tanganicana | DRC | Upemba National Park | −9.0442 | 26.9966 | OZ347428 | OZ347984 | OZ347954 | OZ347966 |
| CKD-442 |
|
Ichnotropis tanganicana | DRC | Upemba National Park | −9.0442 | 26.9966 | OZ347429 | OZ347985 | OZ347955 | |
| MTSN 9947 |
|
Ichnotropis tanganicana | DRC | Kindingi, West of Kabobo Plateau | −5.2626 | 28.9076 | OZ347430 | OZ347956 | ||
| ABH3 | Meroles squamulosus | Mozambique | unknown | JX962896 | EF632221 | EF632266 | ||||
| ABH9 | Meroles squamulosus | Tanzania | Laela | −8.7500 | 32.1833 | JX962897 | JX963022 | JX962915 | ||
| MBUR00872 | Meroles squamulosus | South Africa | Cleveland, Limpopo | −24.0219 | 31.1991 | LT745784 | LT745812 | LT745838 | ||
| RSP373 | Meroles squamulosus | South Africa | Venetia Limpopo Reserve, Limpopo | −22.2661 | 29.3329 | HF547777 | HF547737 | HF547699 | ||
| SVN362 |
|
Meroles squamulosus | South Africa | Lapalala Game Reserve, Limpopo Landmanslust, Limpopo |
−23.8759 | 28.3061 | HF547776 | HF547736 | HF547697 | |
| WP125 | Meroles squamulosus | South Africa | Rooipoort Nature Reserve Northern Cape | −28.5937 | 24.2100 | HF547778 | HF547738 | HF547701 |
DNA was isolated from tissue samples using a standard salt extraction method (
For the phylogenetic analyses, 46 Ichnotropis individuals were sequenced, supplemented with sequences from 10 individuals available from GenBank. Six Meroles squamulosus individuals were used as outgroup taxa (Table
The optimal partition scheme and best-fitting models of molecular evolution were selected using ModelFinder implemented in IQ-TREE (
Maximum likelihood phylogenies were generated in IQ-TREE, using a random starting tree and the best-fitting model schemes selected for each dataset (as selected above). The ultrafast bootstrap approximation (UFBoot) method (
Bayesian inference (BI) was run using MrBayes v.3.2.7a (
Species delimitation analyses were performed to explore species boundaries and elucidate whether there was potential cryptic diversification within Ichnotropis. Mitochondrial genes (16S, ND4) were combined for species delimitation analyses, excluding the outgroup taxa, and the sequences were trimmed to 1134 bp to minimise missing data in the datasets. Several different delimitation analyses were run: Automatic Barcode Gap Discovery (ABGD), Assemble Species by Automatic Partitioning (ASAP), Poisson Tree Processes (PTP), Multi-rate Poisson Tree Process (mPTP), and Bayesian Poisson Tree Processes (bPTP). Alignments were prepared and uploaded onto the ABGD Web Interface (https://bioinfo.mnhn.fr/abi/public/abgd/abgdweb.html, web version 22 May 2023) and the ASAP Web Interface (https://bioinfo.mnhn.fr/abi/public/asap/asapweb.html, web version 22 May 2023) as FASTA files. For ABGD, the following settings were used: Standard pairwise distance (p distance) metrics, minimum barcode gap width (1), intraspecific divergence minimum (0.001) and maximum (0.1) (
Uncorrected pairwise distances (p distances) were estimated in MEGA X (
We examined all newly collected material in the collections of the
National Museum of Namibia (
Scale nomenclature, scale counts, and measurements used in the descriptions follow previous studies on African Lacertidae (
The following scalation details were recorded with the aid of a dissecting microscope: ; Number of supralabials (SL, anterior to the subocular) ; number of infralabials (IL); the number and condition of the nasal scales; the number and condition of the loreals ; scalation condition of the lower eyelids; number of supraciliaries (SC) ; the condition of temporal scales and the elongate temporal plate (scales between parietals and temporal scales) ; the degree of head striations (ridges) present on the dorsal head; the condition of the tympanum opening and the tympanic shield ; the condition of the frontonasals (FN) ; prefrontals (PF, whether the PF is in contact with anterior SO and if the PF is in contact with 1st SC), frontal (F) , interparietal (IP) , parietals (P) and occipital scales (O) ; number of supraoculars (SO) [note: for this study we restrict the supraoculars to the two larger scales and refer to the cluster of 1–4 smaller scales posterior to the 2nd SO as the post-supraoculars]; number of smaller scales in front of the anterior SO, touching frontal, prefrontal and 1st SC; number of granules in contact with the two large SO and SC ; number of paired chin shields (CS, and the number in contact) ; midbody scale rows (MSR) ; longitudinal ventral scale rows (LVSR, counted midway between fore- and hind limbs) ; transverse rows of ventrals (TVSR, counted from the axilla to the groin); femoral pores (right/left) ; and subdigital lamellae under the 4th toe (LUFT).
To investigate the morphological variation between Ichnotropis species and to compare them with previously published material (
In order to explore other potential diagnostic characters between species, we tested the morphological variation in Dataset 1 and 2 across different taxa using permutational ANOVAs (PERMANOVAs) with the package RRPP (
To enable production of contemporary geographic distribution maps for all Ichnotropis species, observation locations were sourced from published datasets (e.g.,
Both maximum likelihood and Bayesian inference analyses recovered identical topologies for the concatenated dataset (Figs
Ichnotropis tanganicana was consistently supported as sister to all other congeners in all analyses, from which it is highly divergent (Table
Mean sequence divergences (uncorrected p distances) between Ichnotropis species for 16S and ND4 genes, given as percentages. The numbers in the diagonal grey boxes represent the mean intraspecific sequence divergences and standard errors, numbers below the diagonal grey boxes represent the mean interspecific sequence divergences, while numbers above the diagonal grey boxes represent standard errors of the interspecific sequence divergences. n/c – was not possible to estimate sequence divergences.
| 16S | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | |
| 1 | I. capensis sensu lato | 3.0 ± 0.5 | 0.9 | 1.5 | 1.4 | 1.4 | 1.4 | 1.7 | 1.6 |
| 2 | I. longicorpa sp. nov. | 5.9 | 2.6 ± 0.8 | 1.5 | 1.4 | 1.3 | 1.2 | 1.6 | 1.6 |
| 3 | I. robusta sp. nov. | 11.2 | 12.0 | 0.2 ± 0.2 | 1.1 | 1.4 | 1.3 | 1.7 | 1.5 |
| 4 | I. grandiceps | 11.5 | 11.8 | 6.3 | n/c | 1.4 | 1.3 | 1.7 | 1.6 |
| 5 | I. b. pallida | 11.6 | 10.5 | 9.9 | 10.3 | n/c | 0.9 | 1.7 | 1.5 |
| 6 | I. b. bivittata | 11.5 | 9.8 | 8.8 | 9.3 | 5.4 | 3.8 ± 0.8 | 1.6 | 1.4 |
| 7 | I. microlepidota | 16.4 | 16.1 | 16.4 | 16.1 | 14.4 | 13.9 | n/c | 1.8 |
| 8 | I. tanganicana | 15.8 | 14.5 | 12.9 | 13.8 | 13.1 | 12.2 | 18.4 | 1.8 ± 0.4 |
| ND4 | |||||||||
| 1 | I. capensis sensu lato | 7.7 ± 0.6 | 0.8 | 1.3 | 1.3 | 1.4 | 1.1 | 1.3 | 1.2 |
| 2 | I. longicorpa sp. nov. | 12.3 | 6.6 ± 0.6 | 1.3 | 1.3 | 1.4 | 1.1 | 1.3 | 1.2 |
| 3 | I. robusta sp. nov. | 22.1 | 19.6 | 1.4 ± 0.3 | 1.3 | 1.6 | 1.2 | 1.5 | 1.4 |
| 4 | I. grandiceps | 22.3 | 20.4 | 15.3 | n/c | 1.6 | 1.2 | 1.5 | 1.4 |
| 5 | I. b. pallida | 21.5 | 20.6 | 22.3 | 20.7 | n/c | 1.1 | 1.6 | 1.7 |
| 6 | I. b. bivittata | 19.2 | 17.6 | 20.0 | 19.6 | 12.8 | 9.4 ± 0.9 | 1.3 | 1.3 |
| 7 | I. microlepidota | 24.0 | 21.6 | 24.4 | 24.4 | 22.6 | 20.6 | n/c | 1.4 |
| 8 | I. tanganicana | 19.1 | 18.0 | 21.7 | 21.8 | 22.7 | 19.4 | 21.2 | 0.1 ± 0.1 |
IQ-TREE maximum likelihood consensus phylogeny for Ichnotropis with likelihood bootstrap support values (above) and Bayesian posterior probabilities (below) indicated at each node (see key in top left). The coloured bars to the right of the phylogeny summarise the results for each of the species delimitation analyses. Inset image: I. capensis sensu stricto. The scale bar represents substitutions/site.
Ichnotropis microlepidota was recovered as sister to the I. bivittata clade, though this relationship was not strongly supported in the BI analysis. Nevertheless, all species delimitation analyses favoured its specific status, with notably high pairwise p distances for 16S and ND4 genes (Table
Ichnotropis grandiceps was recovered as a sister taxon to the I. capensis group. Furthermore, newly collected material from Angola was recovered as a distinct lineage, sister to a sample from Namibia (RE211206D1) collected from near the type locality of I. grandiceps, and with high divergence in both mitochondrial markers (Table
Within the I. capensis group, high levels of intraspecific variation were detected, with three major clades (Clades 1–3) returned in the phylogenetic analysis. Species delimitation analyses recovered between three and seven candidate species among these clades, which do not necessarily agree with the three major clades. Sequence divergence among Clade 1 with Clades 2 and 3 (collectively referred to as I. capensis sensu lato) was >5% for 16S and ~12% for ND4 (Table
The two PCAs produced similar results despite analysing different subsets of original variables. In PCA1 (Dataset 1), PC1 (37.3%) and PC2 (13.11%) together explained 50.41% of the total variation, with PC1 primarily correlated to head-related variables (HL and SE) and PC2 correlated to limb measurements (FTL and HFL; Fig.
Above: Scatterplots of the first two principal components for Ichnotropis, based on the full Dataset 1 (A) and reduced Dataset 2 (B). Arrows indicate the loadings of morphological variables (see Materials and Methods for abbreviations). The green star marks the holotype of Ichnotropis capensis nigrescens (BE_RMCA_Vert.R.14641), and the brown star marks the holotype of Ichnotropis overlaeti (BE_RMCA_Vert.R.9691). Below: Box plots showing C snout–vent length (SVL), D head width (HW), and E head height (HH). Species are represented by different colours, and species groups are enclosed by polygons, as indicated in the legend.
In addition, the PERMANOVA analysis revealed additional significant differences not captured by the MANOVA of the principal components, primarily in snout–vent length (SVL) and two head measurements (head width, HW; head height, HH; Table S4). Notably, the new candidate species sister to I. grandiceps exhibited key morphological divergence, differing significantly in HW compared to I. bivittata (ANOVA: F = 10.445, P = 0.030), I. capensis (F = 17.514, P = 0.001), and the candidate species sister to I. capensis (F = 16.096, P = 0.002). Differences in HH were also detected between I. grandiceps and I. capensis (F = 16.483, P = 0.001), as well as between I. grandiceps and the candidate species sister to I. capensis (F = 13.388, P = 0.007). Additionally, I. capensis differed from I. microlepidota (F = 9.443, P = 0.048) and the candidate species sister to I. grandiceps (F = 10.452, P = 0.030) in HH.
The morphological analyses suggest overall, that the genus Ichnotropis can be divided into three distinct morphological groups based on head morphology and scalation. These groupings provide a useful framework for species identification and can be used to support the species hypotheses from the phylogenetic analyses: The I. bivittata, I. grandiceps, and I. capensis groups. The I. bivittata group can be defined morphologically based on a more rounded snout, the prefrontal scale mostly in contact with the anterior large supraocular (89% in contact, n = 86), and with irregular strongly developed head striations. The I. grandiceps group can be defined by a robust but pointed snout, a prefrontal scale that is always separated from the anterior large supraocular, and a head with weakly developed striations. The I. capensis group can be defined by a narrower and pointed snout, the prefrontal mostly separated from the anterior supraocular (96%, n = 288), with prominent and evenly spaced head striations. These morphological groupings are in part supported by the phylogenetic analyses, except for I. tanganicana, which forms its own monotypic clade.
Colouration in Ichnotropis is very variable depending on breeding season, ontogeny, and habitat. However, based on the breeding colouration of males, Ichnotropis can be divided into the same three morphological groups described above. The I. bivittata group has scattered blue or yellow-orange or black-edged white spots on the lower flanks of the body, between the limbs. The ventral scales are often uniform grey, but can have scattered black speckles. The I. grandiceps group is characterised by a uniform brick red-brown dorsum with scattered darker brown speckles. The gular region and flanks can be light yellow in the breeding season. The I. capensis group shows the most variation in dorsal colouration, but is most often characterised by dark black stripes on the flanks with a continuous orange line on the lower flanks between the legs. The gular region and flanks can be light yellow in the breeding season.
Based on the morphological differences (head shape and scalation) and the distinct dorsal colouration differences observed among the adult breeding male material examined, combined with the above-mentioned genetic evidence (species delimitation and p distance analyses), the new material of I. cf. grandiceps and I. capensis Clade 1 from eastern Angola are described below as new species. Our approach to delimitation follows the general lineage-based species concept, which is based on multiple different lines of evidence (morphology, colouration, genetics) supporting independent evolving metapopulation lineages (
The phylogenetic analyses recovered the I. bivittata group that includes I. bivittata (including I. b. pallida), I. chapini and I. microlepidota. However, based on the morphological similarities, we also consider the independent I. tanganicana lineage to be part of the I. bivittata group as it shares the following morphological features with all other members of the I. bivittata group: Short, rounded head; prefrontal largely in contact with the anterior supraocular; well-defined head striations; and a series of dorsolateral markings, which appear as yellow spots in I. bivittata, blue spots in I. tanganicana, or black-edged white spots in I. microlepidota. This group is restricted to the more mesic savannas of central Africa from central Angola to northern DRC and eastern Tanzania (Fig.
Records of specimens from the Ichnotropis bivittata group, based on all literature records (open circles), examined material (closed circles) and genetically analysed material (white centres). Respective type localities are indicated by arrows: Ib – I. bivittata, Ibp – I. bivittata pallida, Ic – I. chapini, Im – I. microlepidota, Icn – I. capensis nigrescens, Io – I. overlaeti and It – I. tanganicana.
Summary of morphological data for the Ichnotropis bivittata group. Measurements are all shown in millimetres (mm). Values are given as a range, with mean ± standard deviation in parenthesis. Juveniles were excluded from the measurements, but were included in the scalation data. For abbreviations see Materials and Methods section. n = sample size.
| Characters | I. bivittata | I. chapini | I. microlepidota | I. tanganicana |
| n = 39 | n = 3 | n = 6 | n = 32 | |
| SVL | 42.2–75.0 (63.2 ± 8.33) | 53.8–58.0 (55.6 ± 2.15) | 48.7–52.0 (50.4 ± 1.45) | 41.0–60.0 (53.9 ± 4.21) |
| TAIL | 85–156 (109.7 ± 15.47) | 77 | 69.8 | 55.6–107.9 (81.7 ± 12.15) |
| HL | 12.1–15.3 (13.6 ± 1.22) | 11.7–12.9 (12.2 ± 0.64) | 12.6 | 11.2–14.2 (12.6 ± 0.79) |
| HW | 6.0–9.9 (8.3 ± 1.08) | 7.0 –8.7 (7.7 ± 0.89) | 6.7–7.3 (7.0 ± 0.20) | 6.1–8.7 (7.6 ± 0.51) |
| HH | 5.4–8.7 (7.2 ± 0.90) | 6.5 | 5.3–6.7 (5.9 ± 0.62) | 5.2–8.4 (6.8 ± 0.71) |
| ED | 4.1–4.7 (4.4 ± 0.29) | 4.2–5.2 (4.7 ± 0.70) | 3.6 | 3.9–4.5 (4.2 ± 0.18) |
| SE | 3.9–6.8 (5.6 ± 0.90) | 4.9–5.9 (5.4 ± 0.53) | 4.3–5.2 (4.7 ± 0.37) | 5.1–6.6 (5.8 ± 0.36) |
| LL | 14.2–17.2 (15.6 ± 1.6) | 11.5 –13.8 (12.7 ± 1.63) | 13.3 | 12.3–16.0 (13.8 ± 1.02) |
| IL | 23.6–33.9 (26.7 ± 3.31) | 24.3–33.0 (28.8 ± 4.33) | 22.5 | 19.4–29.4 (24.8 ± 3.0) |
| FLL | 5.8–9.4 (7.5 ± 1.13) | 6.1–6.9 (6.5 ± 0.52) | 5.4 | 4.7–8.7 (6.5 ± 0.80) |
| HLL | 9.0–12.4 (10.4 ± 1.28) | 9.2–9.5 (9.3 ± 0.23) | 7.4 | 7.9–10.7 (9.2 ± 0.79) |
| TAIL/SVL | 1.3–2.4 (1.8 ± 0.28) | 1.3 | 1.4 | 1.2–2.0 (1.6 ± 0.23) |
| HL/SVL | 0.2 (0.2 ± 0.01) | 0.2 (0.2 ± 0.02) | 0.3 | 0.2–0.3 (0.2 ± 0.02) |
| ES/HL | 0.4–0.5 (0.4 ± 0.02) | 0.4–0.5 (0.4 ± 0.02) | 0.4 | 0.4–0.5 (0.5 ± 0.01) |
| HW/HL | 0.5–0.7 (0.6 ± 0.05) | 0.3–0.7 (0.6 ± 0.10) | 0.6 | 0.6 (0.6 ± 0.03) |
| MSR | 29–40 | 34–35 | 43–50 | 28–42 |
| LVSR | 8–10 | 8–10 | 8 –10 | 8–10 |
| TVSR | 22–31 | 24–25 | 26–30 | 20–27 |
| SL | 3–6 (mostly 4) | 4–5 (mostly 4) | 4 | 3–5 (mostly 4) |
| IL | 6–9 (mostly 6) | 6–7 (mostly 6) | 6–8 (mostly 7) | 5–7 (mostly 6) |
| SC | 3–4 (mostly 4) | 3–5 (mostly 4) | 4 | 4–5 (mostly 4) |
| LUFT | 17–24 | 18–20 | 16–19 | 17–22 |
| Femoral pores | 10–14 | 8–9 | 10–13 | 10–15 |
When
In the same paper,
Ichnotropis capensis nigrescens Laurent, 1952: 201 (new synonymy); Ichnotropis bivittata pallida Laurent, 1964: 64 (new synonymy).
A medium-sized lacertid with a rounded snout and strongly striated head scales. Nostril pierced between three nasals; the supranasals in broad contact behind the rostral; single frontonasal as broad as long; paired prefrontal scales in broad contact medially; prefrontal mostly in contact with the anterior supraocular (separate in BE_RMCA_Vert.R.40 [I. overlaeti paratype], BE_RMCA_Vert.R.14641 [I. capensis nigrescens holotype] and NMZB-UM 16358), separated from the first supraciliary by a smaller scale (rarely in contact); two large supraoculars, which are separated from the supraciliaries by one row (or rarely two rows anteriorly) of small scales (7–9) and preceded by a cluster of 2–5 smaller scales; 1–3 smaller post-supraocular scales; paired frontoparietal scales in broad contact; two parietals separated by an interparietal; occipital scale not reaching much past parietals; two loreal scales present, the anterior one smaller than the posterior; posterior loreal is separated from the anterior supraocular by two smaller scales; subocular in contact with lip; 3–6 (mostly 4) supralabials anterior to the subocular and two posteriorly; 6–9 (mostly 6) infralabials; 5 (rarely 6) chin shields, with the anterior three (rarely four) in broad contact; 3–4 (mostly 4) supraciliaries; 29–40 midbody scale rows; 8–10 longitudinal rows of enlarged ventral plates; 22–31 transverse ventral scale rows; 17–24 subdigital lamellae under the 4th toe; 10–14 femoral pores per thigh. Size: Adult specimens varied from 42.2–75.0 mm (mean: 63.2 mm) SVL and 85.0–156 mm (mean: 109.7mm) TAIL. Largest female: 71 mm SVL (FMNH 74288 – Serra do Moco, Angola); largest male: 75 mm SVL (NMZB-UM 16358 – Chitau, Angola). Colouration (Fig.
Photographs in life of Ichnotropis bivittata depicting the closely spaced yellow spots just posterior to the forelimbs. Specimens photographed at A Cuito town (
Ichnotropis bivittata is known from Angola’s central plateau, with its range extending northward into western DRC, the Republic of the Congo, and southeastern Gabon (Fig.
Ichnotropis bivittata inhabits wet Miombo woodlands, preferring open, sandy areas suitable for thermoregulation and foraging. It is a diurnal, terrestrial species and an active forager, primarily preying on small arthropods such as ants, beetles, and termites (
When I. chapini was described, it was differentiated from its congeners based on the presence of an anterior supraloreal, thus having two anterior loreal scales (
AMNH 10674, adult female, collected from Aba, Haut-Uele Province, DRC in July 1911.
A medium-sized lacertid with a robust, rounded snout. Head scalation moderately striated. Nostril pierced between three nasals; the supranasals are in broad contact behind the rostral; single frontonasal, as broad as long; paired prefrontal scales in broad contact medially; prefrontal not in contact with anterior supraocular and separated from the supraciliaries by a smaller scale; two large supraoculars, which are separated from the supraciliaries by one row of small scales (6–8) and preceded by a cluster of 2–3 (3 median) smaller scales; one post-supraocular scale; two loreal scales present, which are separated from the anterior supraocular by two scales (except in the holotype, where the anterior loreal is divided to form a supraloreal on both sides and on the left side of BE_RMCA_Vert.R.3657); subocular in contact with lip; 4–5 (mostly 4) supralabials in front of subocular; 6–7 (mostly 6) infralabials; five chin shields, with the anterior 2–3 in broad contact (in the holotype only the first two chin shields are in contact, while in BE_RMCA_Vert.R.3657 the third chin shield is in narrow contact anteriorly); 3–5 (mostly 4) supraciliaries; 34–35 midbody scale rows; 8–10 longitudinal rows of enlarged ventral plates; 24–25 transverse ventral scale rows;18–20 subdigital lamellae under 4th toe; 8–9 femoral pores per thigh. Size: Adult specimens varied from 53.8–58.0 mm (median: 55.0 mm) SVL and 77 mm TAIL (all specimens’ tails missing or truncated; this measurement is based on
Only known from northeastern DRC in the vicinity of Aba (Fig.
Very little is known about this species, but it is expected to have similar habitat requirements to other Ichnotropis species.
Described based on five specimens retrieved from the crop of a Dark Chanting Goshawk (Melierax metabates) at the base of Serra do Moco (the geographical feature of Serra do Moco which includes the highest peak in Angola at 2620 m a.s.l., is often colloquially referred to as Mount Moco) (
Ichnotropis microlepidota (MHNCUP-REP0983) specimen from Serra do Moco, Huambo Province, Angola (adapted from
FMNH 74285, adult male, collected from the ‘foot of Mount Moco’ [= Serra do Moco], Huambo Province, Angola, by Gerd Heinrich on 19 September 1954.
FMNH 74283–84 (females), FMNH 74286–87 (males); same collection details as holotype.
MHNCUP-REP0983, adult male, collected at Serra do Moco, Huambo Province, Angola (–12.4554°, 15.1632°, 2300 m a.s.l.), on 18 October 2020 by Pedro Vaz Pinto (
A medium-sized, robust lacertid with a rounded snout and strongly striated and keeled head scales. Nostril pierced between three nasals; the supranasals are in broad contact behind the rostral; single frontonasal, as broad as long; paired prefrontal scales in broad contact medially; prefrontal in contact with the anterior supraocular and either in contact or narrowly separated from supraciliaries by a smaller scale; two large supraoculars, preceded by a single scale (documented by
Currently only known from the slopes of Serra do Moco, in the central Angolan highlands (Fig.
The specimens from the type series were preyed upon by a dark chanting goshawk (Melierax metabates) (
This species was described from the ‘East Coast [of] Lake Tanganyika’ in modern-day Tanzania based on a single subadult specimen that was collected in 1896. When
In this study, an adult female specimen collected from the mid-elevation Miombo woodlands west of the Kabobo Plateau, DRC (MTSN 9947; Fig.
Photographs in life of Ichnotropis tanganicana from across its range, depicting the evenly spaced dorsolateral blue spots. Photographs from A Rukwa, Tanzania; B Cambua, Democratic Republic of the Congo; C Rumphi, Malawi (https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/146895735); D Nyika National Park, Malawi (https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/146684850); E Kindingi, Lake Tanganyika (MTSN 9947), Democratic Republic of the Congo; and F Upemba National Park, Democratic Republic of the Congo (https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/249778421). Photographs: David Lloyd-Jones; B – Colin Tilbury, C – Marc Henrion, D – Tim Brammer, E – Wandege Muninga, D – Naftali Honig.
Of special interest is the case of the first specimens of I. bivittata from Ipemi, Udzungwa Mountains, Tanzania, documented by
Additionally, de Witte and
Holotype (BE_RMCA_Vert.R.9691) of Ichnotropis overlaeti from Kapanga, Haut-Katanga Province, Democratic Republic of the Congo. Photographs of body in A ventral and B dorsal (note the evenly spaced white dorsolateral spots indicated by the arrows) views, and head in C dorsal, D lateral and E ventral views. Scale bars represent 10 mm. Photographs: Max Benito.
Other published sources showing photographs of I. bivittata (sic) with blue spots include
Based on the combined evidence, all the above material can thus be confidently assigned to I. tanganicana. We therefore take this opportunity to expand on the original description of I. tanganicana and synonymise I. overlaeti with I. tanganicana.
Ichnotropis overlaeti de Witte & Laurent, 1942: 173 (new synonymy).
A medium-sized lacertid with a robust, rounded snout. Head scalation weakly to moderately striated. Nostril pierced between three nasals; the supranasals are in broad contact behind the rostral; single frontonasal, as broad as long; paired prefrontal scales in broad contact medially; prefrontal mostly in contact with the anterior supraocular (n = 29 in contact, seven not in contact; three in contact on one side only) and separated from supraciliaries by a smaller scale; two large supraoculars, which are either in direct contact (n = 15) or separated (n = 18) from the supraciliaries by a series of small scales; those that are not in contact are separated by one row of small scales (3–9) and preceded by a cluster of 1–6 (1.7 average) smaller scales; one post-supraocular scale; two loreal scales present, which are separated from the anterior supraocular by two scales; subocular in contact with lip; 3–5 (mostly 4) supralabials in front of subocular; 5–7 (mostly six) infralabials; five chin shields, with the anterior three in broad contact; 4–5 (mostly four) supraciliaries; 28–42 (average: 36.0) midbody scale rows; 8–10 (average: 8.4) longitudinal rows of enlarged ventral plates; 20–27 (average: 22.8) transverse ventral scale rows; 17–22 subdigital lamellae under the 4th toe; 10–15 femoral pores per thigh. Size: Adult specimens varied from 41.0–60.0 mm (mean: 53.9 mm) SVL and 55.6–107.9 mm (mean: 81.7 mm) TAIL. Largest female: 60 mm SVL (NMZB-UM 24433 – Misuku Hills, Malawi); largest male: 56 mm SVL (NMZB-UM 24432 – Misuku Hills, Malawi). Colouration (Fig.
Known from western Tanzania, south to northern Malawi, and eastward to northern Zambia and southern DRC (Fig.
The Lukwati specimen was discovered in grassland adjacent to Brachystegia woodland. This specimen exhibited peculiar leg-tucking behaviour, wherein it raised its body and folded its legs to the sides (
Phylogenetically and morphologically, the I. grandiceps group includes I. grandiceps and a candidate new species from Angola described here, which share the following morphological features: Robust, broad and depressed head; the prefrontal always separated from the anterior supraocular; weak head striations; and uniform brown to red dorsum. This group is restricted to the Kalahari Basin, from central Angola to northern Namibia (Fig.
This is the most recently described species of Ichnotropis. It was described from the western Zambezi Region in north-eastern Namibia, based on only three specimens, and was distinguished from sympatric I. capensis based on its larger size, rounded head and dorsal colouration (
Summary of morphological data for the Ichnotropis grandiceps group. Measurements are presented in millimetres (mm). Values are given as a range with mean ± standard deviation in parenthesis. Data for adults and subadults are presented separately. For abbreviations, see the Materials and Methods section. n = sample size.
| Characters | I. grandiceps | I. grandiceps | I. robusta sp. nov. | I. robusta sp. nov. |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| n = 6 (adults) | n = 4 (subadults) | n = 5 (adults) | n = 11 (subadults) | |
| SVL | 57.2–77.9 (65.6 ± 7.52) | 57.2–77.9 (65.6 ± 7.52) | 71.9–78.8 (74.9 ± 3.12) | 35.6–51.1 (44.6 ± 5.33) |
| TAIL | 103.4–148.0 (124.9 ± 16.21) | 38.5–50.2 (44.9 ± 5.97) | 121.0–140.0 (133.0 ± 8.29) | 68.0–100.9 (88.2 ± 11.76) |
| HL | 12.7–18.2 (16.0 ± 2.11 | 9.9–13.5 (12.0 ± 4.558) | 17.8–18.7 (18.3 ± 0.39) | 9.5–04.7 (11.9 ± 1.60) |
| HW | 7.7–12.0 (9.3 ± 1.97) | 5.8–7.9 (6.9 ± 1.08) | 11.1–11.8 (11.5 ± 0.31) | 5.6–8.5 (7.2 ± 1.07) |
| HH | 6.4–9.7 (7.8 ± 1.39) | 5.4–6.8 (6.2 ± 0.72) | 9.1–9.4 (9.3 ± 0.13) | 5.8–6.8 (6.4 ± 0.41) |
| ED | 4.9–6.0 (5.2 ± 0.50) | 3.0–4.6 (4.0 ± 0.90) | 2.9–3.8 (3.2 ± 0.42) | 2.3–2.7 (2.6 ± 0.16) |
| SE | 6.3–8.2 (7.0 ± 0.85) | 4.6–6.0 (5.5 ± 0.73) | 6.1–8.4 (8.3 ± 0.12) | 5.4–6.0 (5.6 ± 0.25) |
| LL | 14.3–18.3 (16.1 ± 1.99) | 10.5–15.0 (13.3 ± 1.96) | 20.5–24.2 (21.6 ± 1.53) | 1.1–17.0 (13.8 ± 1.90) |
| IL | 24.8–38.9 (30.4 ± 5.99) | 19.4–38.9 (26.1 ± 6.9) | 33.4–40.1 (36.3 ± 2.38) | 18.2–26.0 (22.0 ± 2.77) |
| FLL | 6.9–9.4 (7.8 ± 1.11) | 4.2–6.5 (5.3 ± 1.15) | 7.2–8.6 (8.3 ± 0.62) | 3.8–6.4 (5.1 ± 0.89) |
| HLL | 10.6–13.7 (11.8 ± 1.35) | 7.0–9.0 (8.3 ± 1.13) | 12.8– 13.9 (13.4 ± 0.44) | 6.5– 10.5 (8.7 ± 1.35) |
| TAIL/SVL | 1.3–2.2 (1.9 ± 0.34) | 2.0 (2.0 ± 0.02) | 1.6–1.9 (1.8 ± 0.17) | 1.8–2.1 (2.0 ± 0.09) |
| HL/SVL | 0.2–0.3 (0.2 ± 0.01) | 0.3 (0.3 ± 0.01) | 0.2–0.3 (0.2 ± 0.01) | 0.3 (0.3 ± 0.01) |
| ES/HL | 0.4–0.5 (0.5 ± 0.03) | 0.4–0.5 (0.5 ± 0.02) | 0.4–0.5 (0.5 ± 0.01) | 0.4–0.5 (0.4 ± 0.00) |
| HW/HL | 0.5–0.7 (0.6 ± 0.05) | 0.5–0.6 (0.6 ± 0.04) | 0.6–0.7 (0.6 ± 0.02) | 0.6–0.7 (0.6 ± 0.03) |
| MSR | 44–47 | 43–48 | ||
| LVSR | 10 | 9–10 | ||
| TVSR | 27–31 | 26–33 | ||
| SL | 4–5 (mostly 5) | 4–6 (mostly 5) | ||
| IL | 5–7 (mostly 6) | 5–7 (mostly 6) | ||
| SC | 4–5 (mostly 5) | 4–5 (mostly 5) | ||
| LUFT | 20–26 | 20–26 | ||
| Femoral pores | 8–14 | 8–14 | ||
USNM 163989, an adult male, collected ‘25 miles west of Mohembo, Botswana, on the border of the Caprivi Strip (South West Africa)’, Namibia by T.N. Liversedge and S.W. Goussard on 20 May 1967.
NMZB-UM 16278 (male) and USNM 163990 (juvenile); same collection details as holotype.
A large, robust lacertid with a pointed snout. Head scalation weakly striated. Nostril pierced between three nasals; the supranasals are in broad contact behind the rostral; single frontonasal, as broad as long; paired prefrontal scales in broad contact medially; prefrontal separated from the anterior supraocular by a smaller scale (except on the right-side of TM 86237) and separated from supraciliaries by a smaller scale (except on the right-side of TM 38309); two large supraoculars, which are separated from the supraciliaries by one row of small scales (5–9) and preceded by a cluster of smaller scales (3–7); 2–3 post-supraocular scales; two loreal scales present, which are separated from the anterior supraocular by two scales; subocular in contact with lip; 4–5 (mostly five) supralabials in front of subocular; 5–7 (mostly six) infralabials; five chin shields, with the anterior three in broad contact; 4–5 (mostly five) supraciliaries; 44–47 (average: 45.6) midbody scale rows; 10 longitudinal rows of enlarged ventral plates; 27–31 (average: 28.3) transverse ventral scale rows; 20–26 subdigital lamellae under the 4th toe; 8–14 femoral pores per thigh. Size: Adult specimens varied from 57.2–77.9 mm (mean: 65.6 mm) SVL and 103.4–148.0 mm (mean: 124.9 mm) TAIL. Largest female: 77.9 mm SVL (RE211206D1/
Known from northeastern Namibia and adjacent Botswana, and from western Zambia (Fig.
Ontogenetic colour differences have been observed between juveniles and adults (this study). Found in sympatry with I. capensis sensu lato. Associated with Baikiaea woodland on deep Kalahari alluvial sands and hard lime-rich soils in open woodland (
Ichnotropis cf. grandiceps –
Measurements (in mm) and scale counts for the type series of Ichnotropis robusta sp. nov. Scale counts given as Right/Left. For abbreviations, see the Materials and Methods section. t = truncated.
| Catalogue No. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Type status | Holotype | Paratype | Paratype | Paratype | Paratype |
| Sex | Male | Male | Male | Female | Female |
| SVL | 73.5 | 71.9 | 72.7 | 77.7 | 78.8 |
| TAIL | 96t | 135.0 | 140.0 | 121.0 | 136.0 |
| HL | 18.7 | 18.5 | 17.9 | 17.8 | 18.5 |
| HW | 11.1 | 11.8 | 11.7 | 11.2 | 11.6 |
| HH | 9.2 | 9.1 | 9.2 | 9.4 | 9.4 |
| ED | 2.9 | 3.8 | 3.1 | 3.0 | 3.1 |
| SE | 8.1 | 8.4 | 8.2 | 8.2 | 8.3 |
| LL | 21.3 | 21.5 | 20.6 | 20.5 | 24.2 |
| IL | 36.3 | 33.4 | 35.8 | 36.0 | 40.1 |
| FLL | 8.3 | 8.6 | 8.6 | 8.5 | 7.2 |
| HLL | 13.8 | 13.3 | 13.1 | 12.8 | 13.4 |
| TAIL/SVL | — | 1.9 | 1.9 | 1.6 | 1.7 |
| HL/SVL | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.2 |
| ES/HL | 0.4 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.4 |
| HW/HL | 0.6 | 0.6 | 0.7 | 0.6 | 0.6 |
| MSR | 44 | 44 | 45 | 43 | 48 |
| LVSR | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 |
| TVSR | 29 | 26 | 26 | 28 | 30 |
| SL | 4/4 | 4/4 | 5/5 | 5/4 | 5/5 |
| IL | 6/6 | 7/6 | 7/6 | 6/6 | 6/6 |
| SC | 5/6 | 5/5 | 5/5 | 5/5 | 5/5 |
| LUFT | 21 | 22 | 20 | 20 | 23 |
| Femoral Pores | 12/12 | 13/12 | 14/14 | 12/11 | 12/12 |
4 specimens: a)
12 specimens: a)
The species name robusta is the feminine form of the Latin adjective robustus, meaning ‘robust’ or ‘sturdy’, in reference to the large, heavy-built adults of this species.
Assigned to Ichnotropis due to the absence of a well-defined collar, digits not serrated or fringed, subdigital lamellae keeled, and subocular bordering the lip. A large Ichnotropis with a single frontonasal; subocular bordering the lip; a single anterior loreal; feebly developed head shield striations; prefrontals well separated from the anterior supraocular; and supraciliaries separated from the supraoculars by a series of smaller scales.
The new species can be distinguished from other Ichnotropis species based on a combination of the following characters: Prefrontals well separated from the anterior supraocular (versus mostly in contact in I. bivittata, I. microlepidota and I. tanganicana); high number of midbody scale rows (43–48 versus 25–42 in I. capensis sensu lato); large, robust head and rounded snout (versus small depressed head and pointed snout in I. capensis sensu lato); four (46%) to five (50%) supralabials anterior to the subocular (versus mostly four in I. capensis sensu lato); distinctive large trapeziform occipital wedged between the parietals, not protruding past parietals (versus occipital usually extending posteriorly, well beyond the level of the parietals in I. capensis sensu lato).
The new species resembles I. grandiceps in its large size, robust, rounded head; prefrontals well separated from anterior subocular; high midbody scale rows (43–48 versus 44–47) and genetic similarity. Due to the lack of comparative adult material of I. grandiceps, no clear morphological and colouration differences could be observed between the two species. However, the two species exhibit clear differences in habitat preferences. All I. grandiceps material have either been found in drier Zambezian Baikiaea woodlands or Combretum-Vachellia bushveld (
In the phylogenetic analysis, the uncorrected p distances show that the new species differs by >6.7% for 16S and >16.3% for ND4 sequence divergence from other Ichnotropis species (Table
Adult male measuring 73.5 mm SVL and 96 mm TAIL (regenerated). Body moderately depressed; head not depressed, 1.7 times as long as broad (HL 18.9/HW 11.1 mm), its length equivalent to 25.7% of snout–vent length, expanded in the temporal region and very distinct from the neck. Adpressed hind limb reaches the anterior ear opening. The foot length is almost equal to the head length (FL 18.3/HL 18.9 mm).
Upper head shields very feebly striated and keeled; nostril pierced between three nasals, the supranasals in broad contact behind the rostral; frontonasal slightly broader than long (2.6 × 2.4 mm); prefrontals much longer than broad (4.3 × 1.7 mm), in broad contact medially, not reaching the anterior supraoculars (separated by a small keeled scale), and separated from the anterior loreal by a small keeled scale; frontal twice as long as its maximum width between the posterior tips of the prefrontals (6.2 × 3.0 mm), rounded anteriorly and strongly narrowed posteriorly; frontoparietals longer than broad; parietals longer than broad (5.4 × 2.8 mm), extending posteriorly, widely separated by a large interparietal and occipital, the latter small and its posterior margin level with the posterior borders of the parietals; an elongate keeled upper temporal shield borders the parietal; two supraoculars, the anterior supraocular longer than its distance from posterior loreal (2.3 mm vs. 1.8 mm), and in contact with posterior half of frontal; the second is smaller, separated from the supraciliaries by nine (right)/eight (left) small keeled scales (except the 4th supraciliary on the left side, which is in narrow contact with the second supraocular); two post-supraocular scales; five supraciliaries, the first two much longer than the others and forming a long oblique suture. Lower nasal in contact with the rostral, first supralabial and anterior loreal; postnasal small, in contact with the other two nasals, frontonasal, and anterior loreal; two loreals, the posterior one much larger; four supralabials anterior to the subocular, whose lower border on the lip is much shorter (2.5×) than the upper; three supralabials posterior to the subocular; temporal scales strongly keeled; a narrow tympanic shield on the upper anterior edge of the vertically elongate ear opening; lower eyelid scaly with a median series of vertically elongate scales. Six infralabials; four (right) and five (left) large chin shields, the first two (right) and three (left) in median contact; gular scales imbricate; no collar.
Dorsal scales rhomboid, strongly keeled and imbricate, lateral scales smaller and feebly keeled, passing gradually into the smooth, rounded ventral plates, which are broader than long; 44 scales around the middle of the body; ventral plates in 10 longitudinal and 29 transverse rows between fore- and hind limbs; preanal scales irregular; scales on upper surfaces of limbs rhomboid, strongly keeled, and imbricate; 12 femoral pores on each side; subdigital lamellae pluricarinate and spinulose, 21 under the 4th toe; caudal scales strongly keeled above and below, except those just posterior to the vent, which are smooth.
(In life, breeding colouration; similar to Fig.
Photographs in life of Ichnotropis robusta sp. nov. Photographs of A adult male (
The paratypes are in general agreement with the holotype in most regards, differing only in: Two large supraoculars, which are separated from the supraciliaries by a single row of smaller scales (7–10) and preceded by a cluster of smaller scales (3–5) (except in
Prefrontal separated from the anterior supraocular by 1–2 smaller scales (in contact in
Only recorded from the headwaters of the Okavango (Cuito and Cuanavale Rivers) and Cuando Rivers in central Angola (Fig.
Ontogenetic colour differences have been observed between juveniles and adults. Breeding colouration males and gravid females were collected in November 2016, while non-breeding females and juveniles were found in February–March 2016. Juveniles were only observed on sandier areas around the source of the Cuanavale River, while two adult females were found on the elevated grassland ridges surrounding the river. Found in sympatry with I. capensis sensu lato.
Based on the phylogenetic reconstructions and the morphological data, the I. capensis group includes I. capensis sensu lato and a candidate new species (described below) from central Angola, which share the following morphological features: A more slender build (compared to the other two groups), the prefrontal mostly separated from the anterior supraocular, and a narrow, flattened head with distinct evenly spaced head striations. This group is restricted to the Kalahari Basin from the central Angolan plateau to northern Namibia, eastward to the east coast of Mozambique and South Africa (Fig.
Geographic records of the Ichnotropis capensis group, based on all literature records (open circles), examined material (closed circles) and genetically analysed material (white centres). Respective type localities are indicated by arrows: Ic – I. capensis, Ilc – I. longicorpa sp. nov., Ilp – I. longipes, and Im – I. macrolepidota.
Ichnotropis capensis was originally described from the “sandy deserts around Latakoo”, which corresponds to the present-day Kuruman area in the Northern Cape province, South Africa. Since its original description, no additional specimens have been collected from the type locality or proximate areas. The nearest known record today is from Giya Camp in southern Botswana, approximately 340 km north of the type locality. This gap in distribution may be due to limited sampling effort in the region (
Summary of morphological data for the Ichnotropis capensis group. Measurements are in millimetres (mm). Values are given as a range with mean ± standard deviation in parenthesis. Juveniles were excluded from the measurements, but were included in the scalation data. For abbreviations, see the Materials and Methods section. n = sample size.
| Characters | I. capensis sensu lato | I. longicorpa sp. nov. |
| n = 256 | n = 12 | |
| SVL | 40.0–67.8 (54.8 ± 5.11) | 62.7–71.2 (66.4 ± 2.37) |
| TAIL | 69.5–149.0 (110.4 ± 17.89) | 117–160 (137.5 ± 15.94) |
| HL | 10.1–14.7 (12.7 ± 0.97) | 13.1–17.2 (15.1 ± 1.16) |
| HW | 5.6–8.6 (7.2 ± 0.67) | 7.8–9.4 (8.7 ± 0.46) |
| HH | 4.5–7.5 (5.9 ± 0.62) | 6.1–8.5 (7.4 ± 0.61) |
| ED | 3.9–6.3 (4.5 ± 0.52) | 2.4–5.9 (4.4 ± 0.98) |
| SE | 4.0–7.0 (5.2 ± 0.77) | 6.0–7.3 (6.9 ± 0.40) |
| LL | 12.5–16.4 (14.2 ± 1.18) | 14.4–18.7 (17.8 ± 1.27) |
| IL | 18.5–31.6 (25.5 ± 3.29) | 27.4–31.6 (28.7 ± 1.42) |
| FLL | 5.0–8.2 (6.2 ± 0.70) | 6.8–8.4 (7.5 ± 0.46) |
| HLL | 7.4–13.2 (10.5 ± 1.25) | 10.6–13.5 (12.3 ± 0.96) |
| TAIL/SVL | 1.2–2.7 (2.0 ± 0.28) | 1.9–2.4 (2.2 ± 0.22) |
| HL/SVL | 0.2–0.3 (0.2 ± 0.01) | 0.2–0.3 (0.2 ± 0.01) |
| ES/HL | 0.4–0.5 (0.5 ± 0.02) | 0.4–0.5 (0.4 ± 0.02) |
| HW/HL | 0.2–0.7 (0.6 ± 0.06) | 0.5–0.6 (0.6 ± 0.03) |
| MSR | 25–42 | 34–41 |
| LVSR | 8–10 | 9–10 |
| TVSR | 20–31 | 25–31 |
| SL | 3–6 (mostly 4) | 4–5 (mostly 4) |
| IL | 5–8 (mostly 6) | 6–7 (mostly 6) |
| SC | 3–5 | 4 |
| LUFT | 16–26 | 19–24 |
| Femoral pores | 6–15 | 10–13 |
Algyra capensis Smith, 1838: 94; Tropidosaura Dumerelii Smith, 1849: appendix 7; Ichnotropis macrolepidota Peters, 1854: 617; Ichnotropis longipes Boulenger, 1902: 17.
A medium-sized lacertid with a narrow and depressed snout. Head scalation strongly striated. Nostril pierced between three nasals; the supranasals are in broad contact behind the rostral; single frontonasal, as broad as long; paired prefrontal scales in broad contact medially; prefrontal separated from the anterior supraocular (only in contact in 15 out of 245 specimens examined) and separated from supraciliaries by a smaller scale; two large supraoculars, which are separated from the supraciliaries by one (very rarely two) row of small scales (4–9) and preceded by a cluster of 3–10 smaller scales; two loreal scales present, which are separated from the anterior supraocular by 2–3 scales; 1–2 post-supraoculars; subocular in contact with the lip; 3–6 (mostly four) supralabials in front of the subocular; 5–8 (mostly six) infralabials; five chin shields, with the anterior three in broad contact; 3–5 (mostly four) supraciliaries; 25–42 (average: 36.7) midbody scale rows; 8–10 (average: 8.8) longitudinal rows of enlarged ventral plates; 20–31 (average: 25.8) transverse ventral scale rows; 16–26 (average: 21.6) subdigital lamellae under the 4th toe; 6–15 femoral pores per thigh. Size: Adult specimens varied from 40.0–67.8 mm (mean: 54.6 mm) SVL and 69.5–149.0 mm (mean: 110.4 mm) TAIL. Largest female: 65 mm SVL (NMZB-UM 9228 – Umtali, Zimbabwe); largest male: 67.8 mm SVL (BE_RMCA_Vert.R.7785 – Dilolo, DRC). Colouration (Fig.
Photographs in life of Ichnotropis capensis sensu lato from A Cuando River source, Angola (adult male), B Cuanavale River source, Angola (adult female), C Xai-Xai, Mozambique (adult male), D Ngonye Falls, Zambia (adult female), E Zambezi Region, Namibia (adult male), F Kosi Bay, South Africa (adult male). Photographs: A–D – Werner Conradie; E, F – William R. Branch.
Widespread, occurring across several countries in southern Africa, including Angola, Namibia, Botswana, Zambia, Zimbabwe, Mozambique, and parts of South Africa and Malawi (Fig.
This species prefers arid to mesic savanna habitats. It is a diurnal lizard, actively foraging for small invertebrates such as termites, spiders, beetles, and grasshoppers. Females lay up to nine eggs per clutch, typically during the summer months from October to November. The eggs measure approximately 5.5–7.0 mm by 8.5–9.5 mm. The incubation period ranges from 56 to 77 days, with hatchlings emerging between January and March. Females may produce up to two clutches within a single breeding season.
Ichnotropis capensis overlaeti – Laurent (1950: 12, in part); Ichnotropis capensis –
Measurements (in mm) and scale counts for the type series of Ichnotropis longicorpa sp. nov. Scale counts are given as Right/Left. For abbreviations, see the Materials and Methods section. t = truncated.
| Catalogue No. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Type Status | Holotype | Paratype | Paratype | Paratype | Paratype | Paratype | Paratype |
| Sex | Male | Male | Male | Male | Male | Male | Female |
| SVL | 67.7 | 63.0 | 64.3 | 63.9 | 65.4 | 66.2 | 63.1 |
| TAIL | 160.0 | 146.0 | 149.0 | 92t | 127.0 | 148.0 | 117.0 |
| HL | 15.6 | 15.8 | 15.6 | 14.7 | 15.3 | 15.8 | 13.1 |
| HW | 8.5 | 8.6 | 9.4 | 8.9 | 8.9 | 9.2 | 7.8 |
| HH | 7.1 | 7.3 | 7.5 | 7.3 | 7.1 | 7.5 | 6.1 |
| ED | 3.1 | 3.6 | 3.6 | 2.4 | 2.8 | 3.8 | 3.0 |
| SE | 6.6 | 6.6 | 6.7 | 6.7 | 6.6 | 7.2 | 6.1 |
| LL | 17.6 | 18.0 | 18.1 | 16.8 | 17.3 | 18.7 | 15.2 |
| IL | 30.8 | 31.4 | 29.0 | 28.9 | 31.2 | 29.5 | 31.6 |
| FL L | 7.4 | 7.8 | 8.2 | 7.0 | 7.5 | 7.3 | 6.8 |
| HLL | 13.5 | 13.1 | 12.6 | 13.3 | 13.5 | 13.2 | 11.5 |
| TAIL/SVL | 2.4 | 2.3 | 2.3 | 1.9 | 2.2 | 1.9 | |
| HL/SVL | 0.2 | 0.3 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.2 |
| ES/HL | 0.4 | 0.4 | 0.4 | 0.5 | 0.4 | 0.5 | 0.5 |
| HW/HL | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.6 | 0.6 | 0.6 | 0.6 | 0.6 |
| MSR | 39 | 37 | 38 | 40 | 37 | 40 | 37 |
| LVSR | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 10 | 9 |
| TVSR | 30 | 28 | 29 | 31 | 28 | 30 | 28 |
| SL | 4/4 | 4/4 | 4/4 | 4/5 | 4/4 | 4/4 | 4/5 |
| IL | 6/6 | 7/6 | 6/6 | 7/7 | 6/6 | 6/6 | 6/6 |
| SC | 4/4 | 4/4 | 4/4 | 4/4 | 4/4 | 4/4 | 4/4 |
| LUFT | 22 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 24 | 22 | 22 |
| Femoral pores | 12/10 | 10/10 | 12/12 | 12/11 | 13/12 | 11/10 | 10/10 |
6 specimens: a)
9 specimens: a)
The species name longicorpa is the feminine form of the Latin adjective longicorpus, derived from longus (long) and corpus (body), referring to this species’ elongate body.
Assigned to Ichnotropis due to the absence of a well-defined collar, digits not serrated or fringed, subdigital lamellae keeled, and subocular bordering the lip. A slender Ichnotropis with a single frontonasal; subocular bordering the lip; a single anterior loreal; feebly developed head shield striations, prefrontals well separated from the anterior supraocular; and supraciliaries separated from the supraoculars by a series of smaller scales.
The new species can be distinguished from other Ichnotropis species based on a combination of the following characteristics: Prefrontals well separated from the anterior supraocular (versus mostly in contact in I. bivittata, I. microlepidota and I. tanganicana); lower number (34–41) of midbody scales rows (44–47 in I. grandiceps and 43–48 in I. robusta sp. nov.); small, depressed head and pointed snout (versus large robust head and rounded snout in I. grandiceps and I. robusta sp. nov.); four supralabials anterior to the subocular (versus mostly five in I. grandiceps and I. robusta sp. nov.); distinctive occipital scale usually extending posteriorly well beyond the level of the parietals (versus large trapeziform occipital wedged between the parietals, not protruding past parietals in I. grandiceps and I. robusta sp. nov.).
The new species resembles I. capensis sensu lato in its narrow, pointed snout, with the prefrontals well separated from the anterior subocular. It differs in that the new species exhibits black spots on the chin shields and gular scales (versus immaculate in I. capensis sensu lato) and the absence of a clear upper white dorsolateral stripe that separates the dark black lateral band from the dorsal brown vertebral band (versus present in most I. capensis sensu lato).
In the phylogenetic analysis, the uncorrected p distances show that the new species differs by >5.9% for 16S and >12.3% for ND4 sequence divergence from other Ichnotropis species (Table
Adult male measuring 67.7 mm SVL and 160 mm TAIL (2.4 × SVL). Body moderately depressed; head distinctly depressed, almost twice as long as broad (HL 15.8/HW 8.5 mm), its length equivalent to 23.3% of SVL, expanded in the temporal region and very distinct from the neck. Adpressed hind limb just reaching the anterior edge of ear opening. The foot length is longer than the head length (FL 19.2/HL 15.8 mm).
Dorsal head shields very feebly striated and keeled; nostril pierced between three nasals, the supranasals in broad contact behind the rostral; frontonasal as long as broad (2.2 × 2.2 mm); prefrontals much longer than broad (2.7 × 1.5 mm), in broad contact medially, not reaching the anterior supraoculars (separated by a small keeled scale), in contact with the anterior and posterior loreal; frontal more than twice as long as its maximum width between the posterior tips of the prefrontals (4.6 × 2.1 mm), rounded anteriorly and strongly narrowed posteriorly; paired frontoparietals longer than broad (3.0 × 2.0 mm); parietals longer than broad (3.8 × 2.6 mm), extending posteriorly, widely separated by a large interparietal and occipital, the posterior margin extending past the posterior borders of the parietals; three keeled temporal scales bordering the parietal, the first one longest, followed by the second and third (smallest); two enlarged supraoculars, the anterior supraocular slightly longer than the posterior one and longer than its distance from the posterior loreal (2.4 mm vs. 1.5 mm), in contact with the posterior half of the frontal, separated from the posterior loreal by two smaller keeled scales; the anterior supraoculars are preceded by a cluster of five smaller keeled scales, the posterior supraocular is followed by three smaller keeled post-supraocular scales, the two supraoculars are separated from the supraciliaries by a single row of nine small keeled scales. Five supraciliaries, the first two much longer than the others and forming a long oblique suture. Lower nasal in contact with the rostral, first supralabial, and anterior loreal (narrow contact on left side); postnasal small, in contact with the other two nasals, anterior loreal, and frontonasal. Two loreals, the posterior one much larger and divided below; four supralabials anterior to the subocular, whose lower border on the lip is much shorter (3×) than the upper border; three supralabials posterior to subocular; temporal scales strongly keeled; a narrow tympanic shield on the upper anterior corner of the vertically elongate ear opening. Lower eyelid scaly with a median series (4–5) of vertically elongate scales. Six infralabials; five pairs of large chin shields, the first three pairs in median contact; gular scales imbricate; no collar.
Dorsal scales rhombic, strongly keeled and imbricate; laterals smaller and feebly keeled, passing gradually into the smooth, rounded ventral plates, which are broader than long; 39 scales around the middle of the body; ventral plates in nine longitudinal and 30 transverse rows between the fore- and hind limbs; preanal scales irregular; scales on upper surfaces of limbs rhombic, strongly keeled, and imbricate; 12/10 femoral pores on each side; subdigital lamellae pluricarinate and spinulose, 22 under the 4th toe; caudal scales strongly keeled above and below, except those just posterior to the vent, which are smooth.
(In life, breeding colouration; Fig.
Holotype (
The paratypes are in agreement with the holotype in scalation, with only minor variation: Prefrontal always separate from the anterior supraocular by one scale (except
Only recorded from the headwaters of the Lungwebungu and Cuando Rivers in central Angola, northwards to the DRC border (Fig.
This species was not found to be sympatric with any other Ichnotropis species, but it occurs in close geographical proximity to I. capensis sensu lato and I. robusta sp. nov. This species is associated with wet Miombo woodland.
| 1a | Snout depressed and pointed, prefrontal separated from anterior supraocular by one or two smaller keeled scales | 2 |
| 1b | Snout robust and rounded, prefrontal mostly in contact with anterior supraocular | 5 (I. bivittata group) |
| 2a | 43–47 midbody scale rows, body robust, head broad, adult SVL > 70 mm | 3 (I. grandiceps group) |
| 2b | 25–42 midbody scale rows, body slender, head narrow, adult SVL < 65 mm | (I. capensis group) |
| 3a | Confined to the drier Zambezian Baikiaea woodlands or Combretum-Vachellia bushveld in western Zambia and the Zambezi Region of Namibia and adjacent Botswana; occurs below 1000 m a.s.l | I. grandiceps |
| 3b | Confined to the Angolan Plateau, which consists of moister Angolan Miombo woodland; occurs above 1300 m a.s.l. | I. robusta sp. nov. |
| 4a | Long, slender body and head; dark black spots/blotches on chin shields and gular scales, no clear upper white dorsolateral line separating dorsolateral black band from dorsal brown vertebral band | I. longicorpa sp. nov. |
| 4b | Short body and head; no dark black spots/blotches on chin shields or gular scales, clear white upper dorsolateral line separating black dorsolateral band from dorsal brown vertebral band | I. capensis sensu lato |
| 5a | ≥ 42 (42–50) midbody scale rows, known only from Mt Moco, Angola I. microlepidota | |
| 5b | ≤ 42 (28–42) midbody scale rows | 6 |
| 6a | Presence of dorsolateral blue or yellow spots in life | 7 |
| 6b | No dorsolateral blue or yellow spots, only known from north-eastern DRC | I. chapini |
| 7a | Prefrontals mostly separated from the anterior supraocular, which is often in contact with the 1st supraciliary; evenly spaced blue dorsolateral spots; occurs in southern DRC, Zambia, Malawi and Tanzania | I. tanganicana |
| 7b | Prefrontal mostly in contact with anterior supraocular, which is always in contact with the 1st supraciliary; closely spaced yellow spots above arm; occurs in Angola, eastern DRC, Republic of the Congo and Gabon | I. bivittata |
Although Ichnotropis species are locally abundant and widely distributed across sub-Saharan Africa, excluding West Africa, the genus remains among the most taxonomically neglected of African lacertids. This historical oversight is likely driven by a combination of strong seasonal activity patterns, which limit detectability outside of peak reproductive periods (
Through expanded geographic sampling, covering much of the known ranges of I. bivittata and I. capensis, and the generation of the first genetic data for I. tanganicana and I. grandiceps, we provided the most comprehensive and geographically inclusive phylogenetic framework for Ichnotropis species to date. Species delimitation analyses, combined with a substantially enhanced morphological dataset, support the validity of most currently recognised species (with the exception that we could not validate the phylogenetic status of I. chapini) and justify the formal description of two new Angolan endemics: Ichnotropis robusta sp. nov. and I. longicorpa sp. nov. These findings underscore the continued importance of integrating molecular and morphological approaches in taxonomic revisions of morphologically conservative lineages.
Conversely, our phylogenetic framework also facilitated the reassessment of several taxonomically ambiguous species and subspecies, many of which had not previously been evaluated using phylogenetic analyses. For instance, although I. b. pallida exhibits notable genetic divergence from other I. bivittata populations, we conservatively synonymise the subspecies with the nominal form until further data become available. Furthermore, based on our findings, we recommend retaining I. longipes and I. macrolepidota as synonyms of I. capensis sensu lato, due to the absence of consistent diagnostic morphological differences and inclusion of topotypic material in our phylogenetic analyses. Additionally, we propose synonymising I. c. nigrescens with I. bivittata, and treating I. overlaeti as a junior synonym of I. tanganicana, based on morphological congruence. Newly collected Ichnotropis material from west of the Kabobo Plateau and Upemba National Park in DRC allowed us to reassess the poorly known I. tanganicana, previously known only from its type specimen and a vague type locality (
While there was a more comprehensive sampling for I. capensis relative to I. bivittata, the limited material available for I. bivittata (n = 4, including topotypic I. b. pallida) exhibited moderate genetic divergence, and species delimitation analyses consistently identified these lineages as distinct. Given the broad unsampled distribution of I. bivittata, coupled with the high genetic diversity observed within the available dataset, increased geographic sampling, especially within topographically complex Angola, DRC, Republic of the Congo and Gabon, may reveal additional cryptic diversity. Moreover, our species delimitation analyses recovered multiple putative candidate species within the I. capensis sensu lato complex. It must be noted that some of these lineages may correspond to previously described species, such as I. longipes, but resolving this will require targeted sampling from type localities or museomics (i.e., historical DNA [hDNA]) to assess potential synonymy or revalidation (
The species delimitation analyses confirmed the species status of both newly described and previously recognised taxa, less conservative methods also revealed potential cryptic diversity within I. tanganicana, I. bivittata, I. longicorpa sp. nov., and I. capensis sensu lato. We caution that single-locus approaches can overestimate species boundaries by conflating intraspecific variation with interspecific divergence, especially under conditions of incomplete lineage sorting or limited geographic sampling (e.g.,
Morphological analyses broadly support the three major clades recovered by the phylogenetic analyses, with diagnostic differences in head shape, scalation, and breeding colouration. These traits are largely consistent across multiple populations, making them valuable for species identification in the field. The I. capensis, I. grandiceps and I. bivittata groups exhibit distinctive morphological characteristics that aid in distinguishing them from each another, even in the absence of genetic data. However, I. tanganicana is an exception: It forms a deeply divergent mitochondrial lineage that is sister to all other Ichnotropis species in the phylogeny; nevertheless, it remains morphologically similar to all members of the I. bivittata group, being thus included as part of this group. The recognition of I. tanganicana as a distinct species is supported primarily by molecular divergence, unique geographic distribution, and its distinctive colouration – most notably the presence of evenly spaced blue lateral spots – underscoring the importance of integrating genetic and phenotypic data in resolving cryptic diversity within morphologically conservative lineages.
Biogeographically, Ichnotropis shows its highest diversity across the northern and western parts of central and southern Africa, with the Kalahari Basin emerging as a hotspot for species richness for this group. In contrast, eastern Africa is represented by only a single species (i.e., I. tanganicana), while South Africa harbours just one taxon from the I. capensis complex. These patterns are shaped by regional habitat heterogeneity, historical barriers to gene flow, and likely also by limited historical sampling in large swathes of suitable habitat (
The description of two new Ichnotropis species from Angola contributes to the wave of reptile species discoveries in the region over the past two decades (
The two new Ichnotropis species described here were discovered through intensive fieldwork in central and southeastern Angola, regions long underexplored due to decades of civil conflict and the difficult access to these areas (
This study presents the most comprehensive phylogenetic and taxonomic revision of the genus Ichnotropis to date. By integrating mitochondrial and nuclear molecular data, detailed morphological assessments, and broad geographic sampling, we reveal that Ichnotropis lizards harbour more diversity than previously recognised. Our findings support the description of two new taxa, indicate multiple potential cryptic species and clarifies the taxonomic status of several historically ambiguous names. The recovered phylogenetic structure and strong geographic partitioning underscore the evolutionary significance of central and southern Africa, particularly the Angolan highlands, as a centre of diversification and endemism for reptiles. This work not only stabilizes the taxonomy of Ichnotropis, but also lays a robust foundation for future evolutionary, ecological and conservation studies for this group across its range.
This work was made possible through the collaboration and support of numerous individuals and institutions. We thank the Ministry of Environment of the Republic of Angola (MINAMB), particularly Dr. Miguel Xavier, Director of the Instituto Nacional de Biodiversidade e Conservação (INBC), for their institutional collaboration. Material was collected and exported under the following permits issued by MINAMB: 31/GGPCC/2016 and 151/INBAC/MINAMB/2019. We also acknowledge the exceptional logistical assistance provided by Fundação Kissama, especially Vlady Russo.
WC thanks the Wild Bird Trust, which administers the National Geographic Okavango Wilderness Project (2015–2019 National Geographic Society grant), and Chris Brooks, who organized the SAREP Aquatic Biodiversity Surveys of the upper Angola catchments of the Cubango-Okavango River Basin (May 2012) and the lower Cuito and Cuando River Basins (April 2013). We are also grateful to the Natural History Museum of Maputo, which endorsed and provided permits (315/MHN/E.27/2014) to carry out part of this work in Mozambique.
This work received financial and logistical support from several institutions: The National Geographic Society Committee for Research and Exploration (CRE 9281-13); the South African National Biodiversity Institute; the National Research Foundation of South Africa (Grant #92776) for the 2014 Mozambique survey; and Khangela Safaris for camp logistics in 2014. CK thanks and acknowledges Upemba National Park, Forgotten Parks Foundation (DPF), Institut Congolais pour la Conservation de la Nature (ICCN), University of Lubumbashi, and Hankuzi Explorations for their assistance with facilitating the collection of valuable Congolese samples for this study.
JLR is currently supported by Associação BIOPOLIS CIBIO Base FUI 2020–2023 (UIDB1 50027 i2020). This work was also partially supported by the Synthesis+ BE-TAF Project 2022 Grant obtained by JLR. We thank the CTM staff at CIBIO – especially Susana Lopes, Sofia Mourão, and Patrícia Ribeiro – for their dedicated laboratory support.
EG acknowledges Ana Betancourt of the Border Biomedical Research Center (BBRC) Genomics Analysis Core Facility for technical services and facilities. This work was supported by Grant 5U54MD007592 from the National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities (NIMHD), part of the US National Institutes of Health (NIH).
We are grateful to Garin Cael (RMCA) and Olivier Pauwels (RBINS) for providing access to relevant material from their herpetological collections. Photographs of key museum specimens were generously provided by: Eugen Behrens (Museo delle Scienze,
We also thank the following individuals for their assistance in the field and sample collection: Ninda Baptista, Gabriella Bittencourt-Silva, Thomas Branch, William R. Branch, Hanlie Engelbrecht, James Harvey, Timóteo Júlio, Michele Menegon, Götz Neef, and Alex Rebelo. Reuben van Breda extends special thanks to Ed Netherlands, Ash Bullard, Haley Dutton, Bernie Jordaan, Bertha Buiswalelo, Francois Becker, and Louis du Preez for their help in the field, as well as Piet Beytell and Francois Jacobs and their team for facilitating fieldwork in Namibia. Specimens in Namibia were collected under the National Commission of Research, Science and Technology permit AN20191118. We are grateful to the late Don Broadley and Bill Branch for allowing us to incorporate their unpublished data on the genus.
List of material examined for the study (+examined by William Branch, *examined by Donald Broadley, # photographs only). Museum acronyms: AMNH – American museum of Natural History,
Ichnotropis bivittata
ANGOLA: #P5-074, P5-075, Alto Cuilo (–10.0853; 19.4624); +DM 1854 (I. b. pallida – holotype), Boca da Humpata, Huila (–14.9333; 13.5167); +
Ichnotropis chapini
DRC: BE_RMCA_Vert.R.3656–7, Adra (Kibali-Ituri), 3.5; 30.5); #AMNH 10674 (holotype), Aba (3.8333; 30.1667)
Ichnotropis microlepidota
ANGOLA: +#FMNH 74283–7, Serra do Moco (–12.4167; 15.1478); MHNCUP-REP0983, Serra do Moco (–12.4554; 15.1632).
Ichnotropis tanganicana
DRC: IRSNB 7845(1–2), IRSNB 7848(1–5), Lusinga, Upemba NP (–8.9326; 27.2055); IRSNB 7850, Mukana, marsh near Lusinga, Upemba NP (–8.9202 27.0278); IRSNB 7852(1–3), Kateke River, Upemba NP; IRSNB 7857(1–3), Kakunda River, Upemba NP (–8.8469; 26.7341); IRSNB 7863, IRSNB 7871, Masomb on Grande-Kafwe River, Upemba NP (–9.0833; 27.2); IRSNB 7875(1–2), Kalumengongo River, Upemba NP (–8.9457; 26.9897);
Ichnotropis grandiceps
BOTSWANA: *NMZB-UM 16278, *USNM 163989–90, 40 km W of Mohembo (–18.2996; 21.4171). NAMBIA: RE211206D1/
Ichnotropis capensis sensu lato
ANGOLA:
Figures S1–S4
Data type: .docx
Explanation notes: Figure S1. IQ-TREE Maximum likelihood concatenated phylogeny for Ichnotropis. — Figure S2. MrBayes Bayesian inference concatenated phylogeny for Ichnotropis. — Figure S3. IQ-TREE Maximum likelihood mitochondrial genes concatenated phylogeny for Ichnotropis. — Figure S4. IQ-TREE Maximum likelihood nuclear genes concatenated phylogeny for Ichnotropis.
Tables S1–S4
Data type: .docx
Explanation notes: Table S1. Primers and PCR conditions used to generate sequences for the study. — Table S2. Results of two principal components analysis (PCA) implemented on Angolan Ichnotropis (Dataset 1) and multivariate analysis of variance of morphological characters. — Table S3. Results of the post hoc pairwise analysis (Tukey’s HSD test) using PC scores as input and Ichnotropis species as fixed factor. — Table S4. Results of the analysis of morphometric differences between Ichnotropis spp.