A new species of the genus Microgecko Nikolsky, 1907 (Sauria: Gekkonidae) from the southern Zagros Mountains, Iran Author Gholamifard, Ali Author Rastegar-Pouyani, Nasrullah Author Rastegar-Pouyani, Eskandar text Zootaxa 2019 2019-07-31 4648 3 435 454 journal article 25433 10.11646/zootaxa.4648.3.2 6688af4f-a096-476e-afbd-77a15285c16c 1175-5326 3356169 3B46DDF7-7ECD-4791-8465-9B99A65561F7 Microgecko varaviensis sp. nov. ( Figs. 2–4 , 8d , 9b , 10a ) Microgecko helenae helenae— Gholamifard & Rastegar-Pouyani, 2015 Holotype . RUZM GT .11.57, collected at Varavi Mountain , 27°30’27.4’’ N , 53°07’10.8’’ E and 1340 m a.s.l. , Varavi District , Mohr County , southwest Fars Province , southern Iran , on 3 September 2013 at about 03h10 by A. Gholamifard. Paratypes . RUZM GT .11.58–63, GT .11.111–112 (n=8), collected at the same locality as the holotype on 3 September 2013 from about 03h10 to 07h00 by A. Gholamifard and local field assistants . Other topotypical material. RUZM GT .11.73–75 (n=3), collected at the same locality as the holotype and paratypes in the Varavi Mountain on 1 April 2015 from about 10h00 to 18h00 by A. Gholamifard and local field assistants . TABLE 3. Specimens of Microgecko from Iran used in the present molecular study, with locality information and Genbank accession numbers. RUZM: Razi University Zoologi- cal Museum; SUHC: Sabzevar University Herpetological Collection.
Specimen number Tissue number Taxon Locality Genbank accession
number
RUZM-GT.11.71 SUHC 5024 M. varaviensis sp. nov. Fars Province, Jahrom County, Jahrom MK531652
RUZM-GT.11.72 SUHC 5025 M. varaviensis sp. nov. Fars Province, Jahrom County, Jahrom MK531653
RUZM-GT.11.73 SUHC 5040 M. varaviensis sp. nov. Fars Province, Mohr County, Varavi Mountain MK531658
RUZM-GT.11.74 SUHC 5041 M. varaviensis sp. nov. Fars Province, Mohr County, Varavi Mountain MK531659
RUZM-GT.11.75 SUHC 5042 M. varaviensis sp. nov. Fars Province, Mohr County, Varavi Mountain MK531660
RUZM-GT.11.56 SUHC 5045 M. varaviensis sp. nov. Fars Province, Firuzabad County, 85 km south of Shiraz MK531661
RUZM-GT.11.111 SUHC 5046 M. varaviensis sp. nov. Fars Province, Mohr County, Varavi Mountain MK531662
RUZM-GT.11.57 SUHC 5047 M. varaviensis sp. nov. Fars Province, Mohr County, Varavi Mountain MK531664
RUZM-GT.11.58 SUHC 5048 M. varaviensis sp. nov. Fars Province, Mohr County, Varavi Mountain MK531663
RUZM-GT.11.59 SUHC 5049 M. varaviensis sp. nov. Fars Province, Mohr County, Varavi Mountain MK531665
RUZM-GT.11.60 SUHC 5050 M. varaviensis sp. nov. Fars Province, Mohr County, Varavi Mountain MK531666
RUZM-GT.11.61 SUHC 5051 M. varaviensis sp. nov. Fars Province, Mohr County, Varavi Mountain MK531667
RUZM-GT.11.62 SUHC 5052 M. varaviensis sp. nov. Fars Province, Mohr County, Varavi Mountain MK531668
RUZM-GT.11.63 SUHC 5053 M. varaviensis sp. nov. Fars Province, Mohr County, Varavi Mountain MK531669
RUZM-GT.11.112 SUHC 5054 M. varaviensis sp. nov. Fars Province, Mohr County, Varavi Mountain MK531670
RUZM- GT.11.80 SUHC 5003 M. h. helenae Khuzestan Province, Izeh County, Bid Zard MK531635
RUZM- GT.11.81 SUHC 5004 M. h. helenae Khuzestan Province, Izeh County, Bid Zard MK531636
RUZM- GT.11.82 SUHC 5005 M. h. helenae Khuzestan Province, Izeh County, Bid Zard MK531637
RUZM- GT.11.83 SUHC 5006 M. h. helenae Khuzestan Province, Izeh County, Bid Zard MK531638
RUZM- GT.11.86 SUHC 5007 M. h. helenae Khuzestan Province, about 5 km to Baghe Malek from Haftgel MK531639
RUZM- GT.11.87 SUHC 5008 M. h. helenae Khuzestan Province, about 5 km to Baghe Malek from Haftgel MK531640
RUZM- GT.11.88 SUHC 5009 M. h. helenae Khuzestan Province, about 5 km to Baghe Malek from Haftgel MK531641
RUZM- GT.11.85 SUHC 5010 M. h. helenae Khuzestan Province, Baghe Malek County, Darvishan MK531642
RUZM- GT.11.65 SUHC 4996 M. h. fasciatus Ilam Province, Sirvan County, Karezan District MK531630
RUZM- GT.11.66 SUHC 4997 M. h. fasciatus Ilam Province, Sirvan County, Karezan District MK531631
RUZM- GT.11.67 SUHC 4998 M. h. fasciatus Ilam Province, Sirvan County, Karezan District MK531632
RUZM- GT.11.68 SUHC 4999 M. h. fasciatus Ilam Province, Sirvan County, Karezan District MK531633
RUZM- GT.11.69 SUHC 5000 M. h. fasciatus Ilam Province, Sirvan County, Karezan District MK531634
RUZM- GT.11.30 SUHC 5011 M. h. fasciatus Kermanshah Province, Sarpol-e Zahab County, around Patagh village MK531643
......continued on the next page TABLE 3. (Continued)
Specimen number Tissue number Taxon Locality Genbank accession
number
RUZM- GT.11.31 SUHC 5012 M. h. fasciatus Kermanshah Province, Sarpol-e Zahab County, around Patagh village MK531644
RUZM- GT.11.32 SUHC 5013 M. h. fasciatus Kermanshah Province, Sarpol-e Zahab County, around Patagh village MK531645
RUZM- GT.11.33 SUHC 5014 M. h. fasciatus Kermanshah Province, Sarpol-e Zahab County, around Patagh village MK531646
RUZM- GT.11.34 SUHC 5015 M. h. fasciatus Kermanshah Province, Sarpol-e Zahab County, around Patagh village MK531647
RUZM- GT.11.35 SUHC 5016 M. h. fasciatus Kermanshah Province, Sarpol-e Zahab County, around Patagh village MK531648
RUZM- GT.11.36 SUHC 5017 M. h. fasciatus Kermanshah Province, Sarpol-e Zahab County, around Patagh village MK531649
RUZM- GT.11.37 SUHC 5018 M. h. fasciatus Kermanshah Province, Kermanshah to Sarpol-e Zahab road, around Sorkheh Dizeh village MK531674
RUZM- GT.11.38 SUHC 5019 M. h. fasciatus Kermanshah Province, Kermanshah to Sarpol-e Zahab road, around Sorkheh Dizeh village MK531650
RUZM- GT.11.39 SUHC 5020 M. h. fasciatus Kermanshah Province, Kermanshah to Sarpol-e Zahab road, around Sorkheh Dizeh village MK531651
RUZM- GT.11.40 SUHC 5026 M. h. fasciatus Kermanshah Province, Gilan-e Gharb County, around Shelean village MK531654
RUZM- GT.11.41 SUHC 5027 M. h. fasciatus Kermanshah Province, Gilan-e Gharb County, around Shelean village MK531655
RUZM- GT.11.42 SUHC 5028 M. h. fasciatus Kermanshah Province, Gilan-e Gharb County, around Shelean village MK531656
RUZM- GT.11.45 SUHC 5029 M. h. fasciatus Kermanshah Province, Eslamabad-e Gharb County, around Mela Har village MK531673
RUZM- GT.11.46 SUHC 5030 M. h. fasciatus Kermanshah Province, Eslamabad-e Gharb County, around Mela Har village MK531671
RUZM- GT.11.48 SUHC 5031 M. h. fasciatus Kermanshah Province, Kermanshah to Pol-e Dokhtar road, around the Saymareh bridge MK531672
SUHC 1273 SUHC 1273 M. chabaharensis Sistan and Baluchestan Province, between Chabahar and Konarak, Rasoul Abad village MK531629
SUHC 1274 SUHC 1274 M. chabaharensis Sistan and Baluchestan Province, between Chabahar and Konarak, Rasoul Abad village MK531628
RUZM-GT.11.54 SUHC 5037 M. chabaharensis Fars Province, Zarrin Dasht County, Rezuiyeh MK531657
Agarwal et al , 2014 M. p. euphorbiacola India KJ794348
Diagnosis. Microgecko varaviensis sp. nov. ( Figs. 2–4 ) is a small gecko with a maximum known snout-vent length ( SVL ) of 28.3 mm . The species possesses all diagnostic characters of the genus Microgecko ( sensu Bauer et al. 2013 ). Microgecko varaviensis sp. nov. has a dorsum without any distinct or indistinct crossbars, with light white spots ( Figs. 2–3 ); and the regenerated portion of tail in M. varaviensis sp. nov. is yellow to brownish-yellow ( Fig. 2 ). In the new species four scales border the nostril ( SBN ) instead of five ( Fig. 9 ); the number of ventral scales from behind the postmentals to a level of vent ( GVA ) is 101–114; the range of dorsal scales in midline between axilla to groin ( AGS ) is 56–71; and the supranasals (internasals) are separated by two granular scales ( Fig. 10a ). Microgecko varaviensis sp. nov. has 6–7 (mean 6.27) supraliabial and 5–6 (mean 5.73) infralabial scales. FIGURE 2. The female holotype (a, RUZM GT.11.57), and paratypes (RUZM GT.11.58–63, GT.11.111–112 marked with the letters b–i, respectively) of Microgecko varaviensis sp. nov. from Varavi Mountain in the southwest of Fars Province, several hours after collection. Note the yellowish regenerated portion of tail in some paratypes and position of the calcium sac (green circle) in the female holotype. Photo: A. Gholamifard. Comparisons. Superficially, M. varaviensis sp. nov. differs from M. h. helenae , M. h. fasciatus , M. latifi , and M. persicus (all three subspecies) by having a dorsum without any distinct or indistinct crossbars, and from M. chabaharensis and western populations of M. cf. helenae (which lack cross bands) by the presence of light white spots ( Figs. 2–3 ). Also, the regenerated portion of tail in M. helenae populations is uniform black ( Fig. 6 ). Microgecko varaviensis sp. nov. has a single pair of postmental shields and, therefore, differs from M. latifi (no postmentals), M. depressus (no postmentals or only one pair of very small postmentals), M. persicus (two pairs of postmentals) and M. chabaharensis (three pairs of postmentals) ( Fig. 8 ). Microgecko varaviensis sp. nov. differs from M. helenae ( M. h. helenae and M. h. fasciatus ) with which it shares one pair of postmental shields, in having a lower range of GVA (101–114) versus 106–123 and 111–130, respectively, in M. h. helenae and M. h. fasciatus . AGS in M . varaviensis sp. nov. is 56–71 versus 63–82 in M. h. helenae and 82–96 in M. h. fasciatus . Also, Microgecko varaviensis sp. nov. differs from M. chabaharensis , and M. p. persicus by having the lower number of supraliabial (6–7) and infralabial (5–6) scales, as compared with M. chabaharensis and M. p. persicus with 8–9 and 8, and 9–10 and 7–9, respectively ( Szczerbak & Golubev 1986 ). For additional comparisons see Tables 1 and 2 . The distinctive morphological features of the above mentioned specimens from Fars Province among all populations of Microgecko with a single pair of the postmental shields, e.g. the lack of dorsal crossbars, white spots on the dorsum, different color of the regenerated tail, lower number of ventral scales ( GVA ) and scales that border nostril ( SBN ), the complete separation of both pairs of internasals ( SSIN ) and post internasals ( SSPIN ) (see Tables 1 and 2 ; Figs. 2–4 , 6–10 ), as well as differences of its habitats in the southern Zagros Mountains from M. helenae in southwest and western Iran , as well as a high uncorrected genetic distance (cytochrome b ) of 15.7% between M. h. helenae and M. varaviensis sp. nov. strongly support M. varaviensis as a new species. FIGURE 3. Adult male (white circle, RUZM GT.11.112) and female paratype (red circle, RUZM GT.11.60) of Microgecko varaviensis sp. nov. at the type locality. Also see Figure 2 of these specimens in captivity. Photo: A. Gholamifard. Description of the Holotype ( Figs. 2 , 9b , 10a ). An adult female with intact tail; SVL 23.64 mm ; TL 24.75 mm ; tail cylindrical, tapering evenly to its tip; head stout with distinct eyes, HL 4.7 mm ; HH 2.57 mm ; HW 4.52 mm ; ED 1.47 mm ; EO 0.2 mm ; NED 1.31 mm ; EED 2.24 mm ; IOD 2.81 mm ; neck distinct, a prominent pair of endolymphatic sacs in the neck region; LFL 8.06 mm ; LHL 10.58 mm ; TrL 9.32 mm ; rostral pentagonal, broader than high, divided by a median cleft, bordered by first supralabials, nostrils, two postrostrals, and the anterior granular scale between the postrostrals; nostril on each side surrounded by four scales ( SBN ), including rostral, first supralabial, enlarged postrostral, and one nasal scale ( Fig. 9b ), nostrils separated by two large postrostrals (internasals or supranasals); enlarged postrostrals are separated by two granular scales, anterior granular scales bordering posterior of rostral, postrostrals followed by an additional pair of enlarged scales (post internasals), this second pair of enlarged scales is distinctly smaller than postrostrals, and separated by two granular scales; three granular scales separate both pairs of internasals and post internasals ( Fig. 10a ); snout covered with small juxtaposed granules distinctly larger than those on crown and upper sides of head and occiput; granules on sides of snout somewhat larger than those on midline; IOS 20, 6 supralabials on each side, posterior labials distinctly larger than succeeding small gran- ules; 5 infralabials on each side; mental nearly pentagonal, bordered by first infralabials, a single pair of postmental shields, and a granular scale, extending posteriorly to the middle level of the first infralabials, not sharply pointed behind, slightly broader than long, followed by one pair of large nearly trapezoidal postmentals, which are separated by one distinct granular scale, distinctly smaller than first infralabial, connected with mental, the first lower labials, and five granular scales in posterior; SBIL 9; SCIL 2; scales of chin and throat granular and juxtaposed. Dorsum covered with equal, smooth, juxtaposed small scales; scales of venter smooth, flat, imbricate, larger than those of dorsum; scales of upper surfaces of limbs slightly larger than those of dorsum, scales of lower surfaces of limbs like those of venter, slightly smaller; no femoral or precloacal pores. FIGURE 4. Subadult specimen of Microgecko varaviensis sp. nov. (LUZM-R 236) from the Varavi Mountain. Photo: A. Gholamifard. Tail covered above and below with smooth scales, slightly imbricate, distinctly larger than those of dorsum and venter, arranged in regular transverse series, 11 dark crossbars on tail (terminal dark point of tail was also counted), as with their light margins wider than yellow interspaces, bordered posteriorly with whitish in the first anterior dark band and yellow in other bands, each dark band gradually becomes darker from light brown to medium brown from front to back ( Fig. 2 ), two enlarged scales on outer side of each pore at base of tail just posterior to level of vent; digits covered above with smooth, small juxtaposed scales, below with single series of smooth lamellae, 14 under fourth toe, toe somewhat angularly bent; GVA 108; AGS 68. Coloration of live specimens. Coloration of the living holotype ( RUZM GT .11.57) is almost exactly the same as the paratypes and topotypes, but the larger specimens have wider dark crossbars on their tail. The upper body surface of the holotype , pararypes and topotypes is uniformly pinkish with two dorsolateral series of white spots, the first pair of which are more distinct ( Figs. 2–4 ). This is in contrast to the distinct or indistinct dark dorsal crossbars ( Figs. 6–7 ) present in M. helenae , M. latifi and M. persicus ( Anderson 1999 ) . A wide dark or chocolate-brown bar on either side runs from behind the rostral, through the eye and ear opening to behind the forelimbs; the lower surfaces of the head and trunk are whitish; the lower surface of tail is yellow; the regenerated portion of the autotomized tail is yellow to brownish yellow ( Fig. 2–4 ). Paratypes . The paratypes do not differ significantly from the holotype regarding scalation, coloration and pattern, with the exception of minor differences in some meristic characters. The range of meristic characters on each side (R/L) for RUZM GT .11.58–63, GT .11.111–112 (n=8) follow: one pair of postmental shields ( PMP ); SL 6–7/6–7; IL 5–6/5–6; SSPM 1–2; SCIL 1–3/1–3; SBIL 9–11; IOS 20–25; SBN 4/4; SSIN 2; SSPIN 2; SBNL 11–13/11–12; SubL 4 th 13–14 (left pes); GVA 101–114; AGS 59–71; none dorsal crossbars from forelimbs region to the sacral region ( DC ), TC 9. FIGURE 5. Selected section of Iran map along the Persian Gulf showing Varavi Mountain and the type locality of Microgecko varaviensis sp. nov. with red line and red circle, respectively (a), General aspect of the type locality in summer (September) 2013 (b). Map is from Google Earth (www.earth.google.com). Photo: A. Gholamifard. FIGURE 6. Microgecko helenae helenae (RUZM GT.11.80–84) from Bid Zard, Izeh County, Khuzestan Province. Note the undulating or indistinct dark dorsal crossbars of the specimens and the black regenerated portion of tail. Scale bar = 1 cm. Photo: A. Gholamifard. FIGURE 7. Microgecko helenae fasciatus from Ilam Province. Photo: A. Gholamifard. The range of metric characters for the subadult and adult paratypes ( RUZM GT .11.58–63, GT .11.111–112) are as follows: SVL 12.98–28.34 mm ; TL 8.91–23.12 mm ; HL 4.2–7.64 mm ; HH 2.51–3.98 mm ; HW 3.2–5.13 mm ; ED 1.06–1.58 mm ; EO 0.17–0.48 mm ; NED 1.29–2.42 mm ; EED 1.65–3.11 mm ; IOD 2.11–2.75 mm ; LFL 4.73–9.35 mm (left side); LHL 5.17–13.54 mm (left side); TrL 5.77–14.84 mm . Topotypes. The topotypes ( RUZM GT .11.73–75) do not differ significantly from the holotype and paratypes regarding scalation, coloration and pattern. Genetic results. The cytochrome b dataset comprised 752 aligned sites, of which 379 were constant, while 59 variable characters were parsimony-uninformative and 314 were parsimony informative. Uncorrected p-distances for the cytochrome b gene of the Microgecko populations of this study are presented in Table 4 . The mean genetic divergences of M. varaviensis sp. nov. from M. h. helenae and M. chabaharensis are 15.7% and 19.3%, respectively. The genetic divergence of the new species from M. h. fasciatus is 20.5%. Interestingly, the genetic divergence between M. h. helenae and M. h. fasciatus is 18.9% ( Table 4 ). The ML , MP and BI trees resulted in nearly identical topology (only the Bayesian tree is shown in Fig. 11 ). Microgecko varaviensis sp. nov. formed a monophyletic group with strong support. Subclades from the southwest portion of Fars Province ( type locality at Varavi Mountain) and central Fars Province (Jahrom and Firuzabad) also have high posterior probability values (1.00) in the BI analysis. Microgecko helenae helenae specimens from Khuzestan Province (Bid Zard and Baghe Malek) formed a monophyletic group with strong support, as the sister taxon of M. varaviensis sp. nov. , whereas all samples of M. h. fasciatus from Kermanshah (Sorkheh Dizeh, Shelean, Patagh, Mela Har, Saymareh) and Ilam (Karezan) provinces formed a distinct monophyletic group with strong sup- port, which in turn contains two main subclades: northern populations (Sorkheh Dizeh, Shelean, Patagh in Kerman- shah Province; subclade A) and southern populations ( Ilam Province and adjacent area; subclade B). Microgecko h. fasciatus is sister to a more inclusive clade including M. h. helenae and M. varaviensis sp. nov. Among the present taxa in the genus, M. chabaharensis ( Fars , and Sistan and Baluchestan provinces) is sister to all other taxa. In this clade, a specimen from Fars Province (Rezuiyeh) shows distinct divergence, and further study of this population is needed ( Fig. 11 ). FIGURE 8. Ventral view of head showing position of the mental, postmental shields and their contact in M. latifi (a), M. h. helenae (b), M. h. fasciatus (c), M. varaviensis sp. nov. (d), M. p. bakhtiari (e) and M. chabaharensis (f). Red squares as the postmental shields (PM), yellow squares as granular scales in a row, separating the first pair of postmentals and first pair of infralabials (SBIL). Scale bar = 1 mm. Photo: A. Gholamifard. FIGURE 9. Lateral view of rostrum showing position of nostril and its surrounding scales (yellow circles) including rostral, first supralabial, enlarged postrostral, and two or one additional small nasal scales in M. h. helenae (a) and M. varaviensis sp. nov. (b), respectively. Photo: A. Gholamifard. TABLE 4. Mean uncorrected genetic distance of the cytochrome b gene between populations of M. varaviensis sp. nov. (southern Iran), M. h. helenae (southwestern Iran), M. h. fasciatus (western Iran), and M. chabaharensis (south and southeastern Iran), in the present molecular study.
M. h. fasciatus M. h. helenae M. varaviensis sp. nov.
M. varaviensis sp. nov.
0.157 M. h. helenae
0.189 0.205 M. h. fasciatus
0.219 0.208 0.193 M. chabaharensis
FIGURE 10. Dorsal view of head showing position of the supranasals (postrostrals, yellow circles) and postsupranasals and their contact in Microgecko varaviensis sp. nov. from the type locality (a), M. h. fasciatus from near Sorkhe Dizeh (b), and M. h. helenae from Bid Zard (c). Scale bar = 1 mm. Photo: A. Gholamifard. Etymology. The species is named after the region where the type material was collected (Varavi Mountain, Varavi District, Fars Province , southern Iran ). Habitat. The type locality of M. varaviensis sp. nov. is in a mountainous area (Varavi Mountain) in the southern parts of the Zagros Mountains, about 45 km from the Persian Gulf ( Figs. 1 , 5 ). Varavi Mountain is a long massif with a length of 124 km and width of 4–8 km and extends from the western border of the Mohr Township to the eastern border of Lamerd Township, both in the southwest of Fars Province . It is parallel with the southern limit of the Zagros Mountains in Bushehr and Hormozgan Provinces ( Fig. 5a ). The vegetation of the type locality consists of different species of thorny bushes ( Astragalus ), seasonal herbaceous cover, thin growth of wild Ziziphus trees, and sparse wild almond trees Amygdalus scoparia Spach , wild pistachio (common name in Persian is Baneh) Pistacia atlantica Desfontaines , and wild fig Ficus sp. ( Fig. 5b ). Woody elements of the vegetation are more abundant at higher elevations and in intact areas of Varavi Mountain. Ecological notes. Microgecko varaviensis sp. nov. , is nocturnal and is one of the smallest recorded lizards of Iran . It appears to be sensitive to temperature changes. The holotype and all paratypes of M. varaviensis sp. nov. were inactive at night and were hidden under large stones, with fairly firm connection to the ground, especially along a dry stream bed, while the first author searched for the gecko on the surface due to its nocturnal activity, especially in the last month of summer in southern Iran . Other specimens (topotypes) were found under large stones with a relatively tight connection with the ground during a spring day ( 1 April 2015 ). In most cases of the gecko collection, under the stones of their shelter was moist. Based on our finding, this gecko uses of large stones as a shelter against adverse environmental conditions during periods of inactivity or hibernation. The first author collected a specimen of M. varaviensis sp. nov. under a relatively large stone with a scorpion, in January 2017 at about 10h00 at a temperature of approximately 9 C° at the type locality. The forested habitat of M. varaviensis sp. nov. on the hillsides of the Zagros Mountains in Firuzabad County (west of Fars Province ) is covered with dominant trees of P. atlantica , A. scoparia , several species of thorny bushes and herbaceous cover.A subadult specimen from this habitat was collected at 08h10 from under a relatively large stone with partly firm contact to the ground in a dry bed of a water course in a shaded area near wild pistachio and bushes. The regenerated part of tail in specimens of both subspecies of M. helenae (from western and southwestern Iran ) is black, whereas in M. varaviensis sp. nov. (from southern Iran ) the regenerate is uniformly yellow to brownish-yellow (see Fig. 2 versus Fig. 6 ). It is probable that this color difference in different populations of Microgecko has an ecological function, namely camouflage in the environment, whereas the black tail would make the gecko more visible to its natural enemies in sparse ground vegetation in the south of Fars Province . Specimens of the new species kept in captivity for several months and fed with small arthropods, especially spiders, show no change in coloration of the regenerated portion of the tail. FIGURE 11. The Bayesian inference phylogenetic tree of Microgecko populations in western and southern Iran using mitochondrial marker cytochrome b . Microgecko persicus euphorbiacola from India was used as the outgroup. Sc A: subclade A; Sc B: subclade B. Some sympatric and/or syntopic species of reptiles in the vicinity of the type locality are: Laudakia nupta (De Filippi) , Hemidactylus persicus Anderson , Pristurus rupestris Blanford , Walterinnesia morgani (Mocquard) , Pseudocerastes persicus (Duméril, Bibron & Duméril) and Macrovipera lebetina (Linnaeus) .