Skink ID

[Blackdog]

I was going through some old photo's this arvo and found a few that I had possibly misidentified originally.
This fella was one of them, from the coastal ranges between Ingham and Cardwell.
What do you reckon it is?

 

[Mitella]

This skink( carlia schmeltzii?) is also on burrumriver.old.au

 

[Blackdog]

Yes it is, most of the lizard photo's on that site are mine.
Carlia schmeltzii was my original ID, and I filed the photo away without any further investigation. The thing that bothers me with that ID is the lack of keeled scales especially near the base of the tail.
This one with three keels per scale is more indicitive of animlas found south of Townsville (A Field Guide to To Reptiles of Queensland - Steve Wilson),
Skinks from further north should have 2 keels per scale.

 

[jordo]

It does look like schmeltzii but Carlias are difficult to ID. I wont give a positive ID based on that photo, I'd need to have a look at the degree of keeling on the scales and possibly the ear lobules to be 100%. There are a few similar species - C. longipes and C. rostralis.

- - - Updated - - -

Yes it is, most of the lizard photo's on that site are mine.
Carlia schmeltzii was my original ID, and I filed the photo away without any further investigation. The thing that bothers me with that ID is the lack of keeled scales especially near the base of the tail.
This one with three keels per scale is more indicitive of animlas found south of Townsville (A Field Guide to To Reptiles of Queensland - Steve Wilson),
Skinks from further north should have 2 keels per scale.

Blackdog your skink is actually Carlia pectoralis, definitely not a schmeltzii.
Open-litter rainbow-skink (Carlia pectoralis) at the Australian Reptile Online Database | AROD.com.au

 

[Mitella]

^does that go for both pictures or only the 2nd one?

 

[jordo]

Oops, the first pic is a schmeltzii/longipes/rostralis and the second pic is a pectoralis. Sorry for the confusion!

 

[Mitella]

Ah now it makes sences

 

[Bluetongue1]

I would say the first pic is C. schmeltzii (3 keels per dorsal scale) with an almost entirely regrown tail, so it must have lost it when it was quite little. Species two I would say is C. pectoralis pectoralis (3 keels on dorsal scales) not quite fully in breeding colours - lackiing bluish flush throat and side of neck.

Blue

Additional Notes: I ruled out longipes in terms of lacking lobules surrounding the ear and rostralis as the black above the forelimb does not extend down along the body,nor does the white extend behind the forelimb.

 

[jordo]

Bluey - check out this paper, a recent revision of the C. pectoralis complex. The subspecies inconnexa was elevated to species and pectoralis was revised and split into 3 species: pectoralis, decora and rubrigo.
http://www.mapress.com/zootaxa/2012/f/zt03546p028.pdf

 

[Blackdog]

Thanks Jordo amd Blue.
I'll add that second photo as yet another misidentification, I am slipping badly in my old age.
Sorry about the quality of the first photo, it does make it difficult, but I can only make out 2 weak keels on some of the scales, which would make sense for schmeltzii from that area (according to Wilson). They just seemed too weak and not enough of them. I'll see if I can dig up a clearer shot.
Thanks for link to the paper too, Jordo.
Cheers,
Mike.

This is the only other shot I have and it's it pretty ordinary as well, although I think I can see a combination of 2 and 3 keels now.
It's probably just my eyes.

 

[Bluetongue1]

Thanks for that Jordo. I noticed the split in AROD but I tend to stick with the most current respectable field guide so most people know what you are talking about. I am aware that another raft of splits and name changes are in the pipeline. I am still struggling with the last lot. Lol. What’s that saying about an old dog and new tricks?...

Blackdog, I took it up to 500% and you can pickup the occasional clear scale with three keels on the side. The keels on the back have not shown up because of the overhead angle of the sun – they are not casting a shadow.

Blue

 

[geckodan]

Thanks for that Jordo. I noticed the split in AROD but I tend to stick with the most current respectable field guide so most people know what you are talking about. I am aware that another raft of splits and name changes are in the pipeline. I am still struggling with the last lot. Lol. What’s that saying about an old dog and new tricks?...

Blackdog, I took it up to 500% and you can pickup the occasional clear scale with three keels on the side. The keels on the back have not shown up because of the overhead angle of the sun – they are not casting a shadow.

Blue

Field guides outdate very quickly. The owner of AROD is often conservative with his changes so if he had added it to AROD then you can bet 100% it will be in the next field guide addition. AROD is your most up to date friend.

 

[Bluetongue1]

Thanks for that Danny. That’s a strong recommendation.


My comment was more based on whether it is widely used by others. I personally think it is a brilliant resource and have been making using of it since it first appeared. It is time I readjusted my mindset and actively promoted it more.

I will admit to having a conservative bias towards taxonomic change – not helped by the likes of Wells, Wellington and Hoser. I do find myself wondering if the presence access to genetic tools is creating a splitter’s paradise where perhaps it is not warranted. I guess the long term will tell.

Blue