miguel camacho!
New member
So my adults were pretty explosively successful last year. I got quite a few eggs, with the last of them from that season hatching over last weekend. I decided, after an extremely busy semester, to finally get around to taking some photos. I managed to photograph most of the hatchlings...I think one has managed to slip by this time by wedging itself in a vine in the back of the cage. Anyway, here's the majority of them.
1: (presumably female)
2: (presumably female)
3: (very unsure, lines make me think male, but fine-grained pattern makes me think female)
4: (male)
5: (presumably female)
6: (presumably female)
7: (unfortunately dropped its tail a couple of weeks ago, presumably male)
8: (unfortunately dropped its tail about 2 or 3 months ago, presumably female)
9: (presumably female)
10: (presumably male)
11: (presumably male)
12: (presumably male)
Last, but not least, the oldest hatchling from November with the youngest hatchling from a little less than a week ago. They appear to be slow growers.
Anyway, I just thought I'd mention, as I have here and there, that by looking at the eye alone, these geckos seem more closely aligned with U. sikorae than U. henkeli. The iris just does not seem to be similar to U. henkeli at all, but it seems almost exactly like the iris of U. sikorae. Does anyone agree? Disagree? I have been wondering for some time now why this undescribed species had taken on the name of U. aff henkeli instead of U. aff sikorae. The outward appearance does look generally similar to U. henkeli at times, but then I see some individuals that appear half U. henkeli and half U. sikorae. The adults are larger than U. sikorae, but smaller than U. henkeli. I also wonder if anyone else keeping this species has noticed any difference in size between adult males and adult females. One of my females is very large, but still not U. henkeli size. I think it will be interesting to see how it plays out over time and if/when they are officially described, which currently described species they will be most closely aligned.
1: (presumably female)
2: (presumably female)
3: (very unsure, lines make me think male, but fine-grained pattern makes me think female)
4: (male)
5: (presumably female)
6: (presumably female)
7: (unfortunately dropped its tail a couple of weeks ago, presumably male)
8: (unfortunately dropped its tail about 2 or 3 months ago, presumably female)
9: (presumably female)
10: (presumably male)
11: (presumably male)
12: (presumably male)
Last, but not least, the oldest hatchling from November with the youngest hatchling from a little less than a week ago. They appear to be slow growers.
Anyway, I just thought I'd mention, as I have here and there, that by looking at the eye alone, these geckos seem more closely aligned with U. sikorae than U. henkeli. The iris just does not seem to be similar to U. henkeli at all, but it seems almost exactly like the iris of U. sikorae. Does anyone agree? Disagree? I have been wondering for some time now why this undescribed species had taken on the name of U. aff henkeli instead of U. aff sikorae. The outward appearance does look generally similar to U. henkeli at times, but then I see some individuals that appear half U. henkeli and half U. sikorae. The adults are larger than U. sikorae, but smaller than U. henkeli. I also wonder if anyone else keeping this species has noticed any difference in size between adult males and adult females. One of my females is very large, but still not U. henkeli size. I think it will be interesting to see how it plays out over time and if/when they are officially described, which currently described species they will be most closely aligned.
Last edited:
