[luevelvet]

While it's true that these species have been previously misidentified or incorrectly described, we've come a long way since then and the physiological differences (in all stages of their life) negate many previous misidentifications. Let's not forget, they are still describing a handful of new species (discussed in the above mentioned article) that are very similar U. henkeli but differ in their DNA analysis; enough so that they are considered their own species, just not yet officially described.

The most important point to take away from the article is that Uroplatus are very adept at extreme variation in morphology so using physical indicators to differentiate species is becoming less and less relevant in the genus than ever before.

It reminds me of the "locale" situation with Panther chameleons.

Great discussion!

Luis

Originally Posted by Luperosaurus

Luis

"There is no doubt that "U. giganteus" is different than the typically wide ranged fimbriatus, but a new species is questionable."


Till 1990 all thought that U.henkeli is color morph of U.fimbriatus. Today we have U.henkeli as valid species. Same was with U.phantasticus - many very good scientists thought that they was long tail form of U.ebenaui, but now we have three, maybe four species in this group. U.alluaudi looking very same with U.pietschmanni and U.malahelo with U.guentheri but they also are different species.

[Luperosaurus]

I'm sure that in the short future few new species and subspecies of this geckos will be described. And as I think it will be mainland form of U. cf.henkeli from Tsingy de L' Ankarana, U.cf.alluaudi from NE part of island U.cf.sikorae from Montagne d' Ambre, long tail U.cf.ebenaui and maybe fimbriatus look small form also from Montagne d'Ambre.
Will see...