N MN . | VOLUME 2 NUMBER 2 www.herpetofauna. comm THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL DEVOTED TO THE WORLDWID | | ESERVATION AND MANAGEMENT OF AMPHIBIAN AND REPTILIAN DIVERSET Wis, FOUNDER AND EDITOR Craig Hassapakis ASSOCIATE EDITOR Jack W. Sites, Jr. Distribution, species-richness} endemism, and conservation of Venezuelan amphibian and. reptiles . and ’ Repiile Conservation (PARC ) to promote education about reptiles and amphibians and protection of their habitats. Visit wuw.ingenta.com to access journal content online (full-text). Subscribers may register with ingenta for free electronic delivery via the Internet. Non-subscribers can obtain full-text articles as pay-per-views. Freely search ingenta's journal database (nearly 3,000 total journals) by keyword. title, and author (journal article abstracts available online free through ingenta). fe the diversity of life Tadpoles THE BIOLOGY OF ANURAN LARVAE Tadpoles The Biology of Anuran Larvae Edited by Roy W. McDiarmid and Ronald Altig “A brilliant compilation of information on the world’s most common aquatic amphib- ians."—Richard Wassersug, Copeia “The present volume, a true magnum opus, is a comprehensive account of larval anu- ran biology and will no doubt become a reference tome comparable with Duellman and ‘Trueb’s classic on amphibian biology. ... Tadpoles is a substantial contribution to the literature and a,;welcome addition to my bookshelf. . . . [A] rich mine of infor- mation to which many of us will be refer- ring for years to come.”—Trevor Beebe, Trends in Ecology and Evolution 458 pages 118 halftones, 181 line drawings, 23 tables Paper $40.00 The Ecology of Invasions by Animals and Plants Charles S. Elton With a Foreword by Daniel Sinberloff “A book has to be really special to be republished 40 years after it first appeared. Elton’s book is. The topic is even more important today than it was back then, because invasive species may now be the most important cause of species extinction. This book is a classic that I would like all of my students to read.” —Stuart Pimm, University of Tennessee, Knoxville Paper $13.00 New from Chicago In Search of the Golden Frog Marty Crump “[T]his is not just a book about frogs; fascinating stories about birds, insects, plants, lizards, and snakes also abound. Complicated biological stories are told concisely but thoroughly, and her humor at describing natural history traits makes them very readable. . . . The story of Marty Crump’s life in the field is fascinating, and told with respect for both the reader and the natural world. . . . This is an extremely likable and readable story of a dedicated scientist in search of her golden frog.” —Sonoran Herpetologica 320 pages 16 color plates, 60 halftones, 19 maps Cloth $27.00 A Naturalist’s Guide to the Tropics Marco Lambertini “This well-illustrated book takes a broad view of a remarkable range of tropical attributes: climate, soils, flora, fauna, man- groves, forests and so on. Many examples are highlighted in detail. . . . So while a guide to individual species is impossible, an enlightening explanation of much to interest any tropical traveller is clearly pre- sented. . . . Enthusiasm for the subject is obvious: the sheer brilliance and variety of tropical life astonishing.” —Birds 348 pages 11 color plates, 57 color photos, 21 maps, 76 line drawings Paper $25.00 The University of Chicago Press 1427 East 60th Street, Chicago, IL 60637 www.press.uchicago.edu FOUNDER AND EDITOR Craig Hassapakis Amphibian and Reptile Conservation Modesto, California Allison C. Alberts Center for Reproduction of Endangered Species Zoological Society of San Diego Jonathan D. Ballou National Zoological Park Smithsonian Institution Aaron M. Bauer Department of Biology Villanova University Andrew R. Blaustein Department of Zoology Oregon State University Harold G. Cogger Australian Museum Sydney, AUSTRALIA C. Kenneth Dodd, Jr. Biological Resources Division U.S. Geological Survey Lee A. Fitzgerald Department of Wildlife and Fisheries Sciences Texas A&M University Julian C. Lee Department of Biology University of Miami AMPHIBIAN ECOLOGY AND CONSERVATION Jamie K. Reaser ») U.S. Department of State, Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental, and Scientific Affairs ASSOCIATE EDITOR Jack W. Sites, Jr. Department of Zoology Brigham Young University ADVISORY BOARD Joseph T. Collins Natural History Museum University of Kansas Carl Gans Adjunct Professor of Zoology University of Texas at Austin Roy W. McDiarmid Herpetology, Biological Resources Division U.S. Geological Survey Russell A. Mittermeier President, Conservation International Washington, D.C. EDITORIAL REVIEW BOARD Harvey B. Lillywhite Department of Zoology University of Florida Peter V. Lindeman Department of Biology and Health Services Edinboro University of Pennsylvania Joseph C. Mitchell Department of Biology University of Richmond Henry R. Mushinsky Department of Biology University of Florida SECTION EDITORS George B. Rabb President, Chicago Zoological Society Vice chair, Communications, Species Survival Commission, The World Conservation Union Hobart M. Smith Department of Environmental, Population and Organismic Biology University of Colorado Michael Soulé Research Professor, University of California at Santa Cruz President, The Wildlands Project Jaime E. Péfaur Ecologia Animal, Facultad de Ciencias Universidad de Los Andes, Mérida, VENEZUELA Christopher J. Raxworthy Department of Herpetology American Museum of Natural History Andrew T. Storfer Wildlife Ecology and Conservation University of Florida Robert J. Wiese Assistant Director of Animal Programs Fort Worth Zoo STATISTICS AND EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN Anthony J. Krzysik School of Arts and Sciences Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University Office of Ecology and Terrestrial Conservation, Washington, D.C. COPY EDITOR Mark L. Goodwin COLUMNIST Craig M. Hoover Senior Program Officer, TRAFFIC North America, World Wildlife Fund Washington, D.C. ARGENTINA Maria E. Bridarolli Instituto Argentino de Investigaciones de las Zonas Aridas, Centro Regional de Investigaciones Cientificas y Tecnoldogicas, Mendoza GALAPAGOS ARCHIPELAGO (ECUADOR) Marco Altamirano Museum of Southwestern Biology, The University of New Mexico and Charles Darwin Research Station Galapagos, ECUADOR INDIAAND MALAYSIA Indraneil Das Institute of Biodiversity and Environmental Conservation Universiti Malaysia Sarawak, Sarawak, MALAYSIA CONTRIBUTORS GRAPHIC DESIGN Kenneth W. Sholar INDEXING AND ABSTRACTING CONSULTANT/E-PUBLISHING Michael J. Tavares WEBSITE DEVELOPMENT AND CONSULTANT Jay G. Henry COUNTRY LIAISONS ITALY AND MADAGASCAR Franco Andreone Sezione di Zoologia, Museo Regionale di Scienze Naturali, Torino, ITALY INDONESIA Darmawan Liswanto Executive Director, Yayasan Titian Jakarta PERU Antonio W. Salas Museo de Historia Natural Universidad Ricardo Palma SOUTH AFRICA Marius Burger National Coordinator, South African Frog Atlas Project, University of Cape Town COMPUTER SUPPORT Mark Warren ZOO LIAISON Chris Banks Curator of Herpetofauna, Invertebrates & Education Animals and Co-ordinator South East Asian Conservation Programs, Melbourne Zoo, AUSTRALIA TAIWAN David McLeod National Experimental High School at Science Based Industrial Park, Huinchu U.S. VIRGIN ISLANDS Father Alejandro J. Sanchez Munoz Pastor of Saint Anne's Parish Saint Thomas VENEZUELA Jaime E. Péfaur Ecologia Animal, Facultad de Ciencias Universidad de Los Andes, Merida Copyright © 2000 Amphibian and Reptile Conservation. All rights reserved. ARC authorizes photocopying for internal or personal use provided the appropriate fee is paid directly to the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc., 222 Rosewood Dr., Danvers, MA 01923-4599, USA. Tel: (978) 750-8400; fax: (978) 750-4470; email: info(@copyright.com; website: www.copyright.com - Editorial WORDS FROM THE EDITOR— With the completion of this issue, we have successfully published our second volume. Our mission is further set, and I think it easy to visualize our intended mission, based on the observation of each new issue. Amphibian and Reptile Con- servation (ARC) now numbers over 700+ subscribers and has printed and distributed 3,000 copies each of both issues 2 and 3, thus making ARC the largest distributed, English language, herpetological scientific journal in the world. I view my role with the journal as “carrying the torch” as editor and publisher, while many interested in assisting the journal have come “on board” as advisors or editors, special section editors, contributors, in-country liaisons, and in other ways. I am grateful for all of this assistance, and would like to invite others with a special interest or talent to contact me for more information and discussion. I am always open to feedback, new input, | x and ideas regarding the journal and/ or the conservation of amphibians and reptiles worldwide, as well as all life. Again, I invite all to participate in what I feel is one of the most important concerns for all herpetologists, not just ones doing conservation related work. Now I would like to briefly outline our progress thus far. The idea for a journal devoted strictly to the conservation of amphibians and reptiles evolved after I sadly left a brief stint at dental school in 1991, much too early to ever practice. Though it was a rather down time for me then (and not the last hurdle I would have to overcome), I found that it would be several more years before I would determine what my life’s work could be. After spending about three years doing a lot of bookwork in the libraries of primarily Utah after leaving dental school, I met a publisher, zoologist, and a former classmate of mine [in my first graduate level class as a student at Brigham Young University (BYU)], Jay Vilhena. It was he that most directed my interest in herpetology into something more concrete and credit should be kindly given. On a long road trip to New Mexico, to deliver a computer system, I told Jay I needed help with focusing my ideas of writing, research, conservation, and herpetology. After a long and contemplated discussion, as well as his background as a long-time friend and associate, Jay announced, that I should publish a newsletter devoted to my interests. This was 1994. After much thought, more time, and finally, some strong persuasions of a spiritual nature, I agreed to undertake the task. Eventually, I progressed the idea from a newsletter, to a scientific journal, to lastly, what I now refer to as amagazine styled, scientific journal. In October of 1996 we published our first modest journal. Fifteen hundred copies of the first issue z Oe it z Helping right a wrong. Our first day filming a documentary at Hetch Hetchy reservoir (background) and holding one of our extras, a bullsnake Pituophis melanoleucus, which wandered across our trail. Reference: www.hetchhetchy.org Authors Amphibian and Reptile Conservation 2(2):40. proved to be far too few as we quickly ran out of stock in about February of 1997, as we continued to have a strong interest in the journal. After a move to the University of Arizona in Tucson, Arizona from my alma mater of BYU in Provo, Utah, in the late fall of 1997 as the first snow began to fall in Provo, the journal and myself were exposed to a new and exciting landscape. Work on the journal was agonizingly slow, but I continued to presevere and make some progress. To help move the journal forward, I again packed up and moved to my hometown of Modesto, California in the late summer of 1999, to be closer to my family and their influence. At each step of the way, throughout the years, I continued in good faith to steadily work and make needed associations to further the work on the journal, though not all of these associations were fruitful. I have left out many of the gory details for lack of space here, and/or left to some future conference gathering (informally), I can attest to the fact that it hasn’t been an easy path to follow with many uncertainties and setbacks. One certainty is my unwavering commitment to continue forward regardless of what must be overcome along the way. Further, as conservation biologist Michael Soulé so accurately stated by telling me in a telephone conversion, it “takes a lot of gumption” to start a journal as I have done, and l-would add, even more to continue in the face of adversity and uncertainty. However, with all struggles and tribulations comes moments of great joy and satisfaction for those who continue on. With the continued publication of this journal I invite all to share in our success. It is my rock solid, determined, and solemn devotion to continue on with the idea that there should be a journal accessible by as many people as possible, devoted to the conservation and preservation of amphibians and reptiles, and their habitats worldwide. Words of my favorite musical artist, whom I had the pleasure to meet just before I left Tucson, comes to mind as he eloquently sang in the album, Late for the Sky, and what I truly feel about my mission with the journal: “Keep a fire burn’n in your eye... Dont let the uncertainty turn you around... Go ahead and throw some seeds of your own and somewhere between the time you arrive and the time you go, may lie a reason you were alive.” (Jackson Browne 1974, select lines from the song, For a Dancer). It is with the publication of this issue that we gain momentum in contributing to the conservation of amphibians and reptiles worldwide. Craig Hassapakis Founder, Editor, and Publisher JAIME E. PEFAUR is Professor of Ecology at the Faculty of Science, University of Los Andes in Mérida, Venezuela. He graduated as a Veterinarian from the University of Chile and received a Masters and Ph.D. (in 1979) degrees from the University of Kansas. Dr. Péfaur has published over 90 papers dealing with taxonomy and ecology of South American vertebrates, as well as edited several books. He was the Executive Secretary of the II Latin American Congress of Herpetology in 1990 and of the HI Latin American Congress of Ecology in 1995. He was a member of the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN)'s De- clining Amphibian Populations Task Force Board of Directors. JUAN A. RIVERO is Distinguished Professor at the University of Puerto Rico, Mayagiiez. He received his Ph.D. from Harvard University in 1953. His dissertation was on the Salientia of Venezuela, which has become the classic text book for any herpetology student of Latin America. He has published over 200 papers, mainly dealing with frogs of Venezuela, Colombia, and Ecuador. He has also authored a book on the Herpetofauna of Puerto Rico. CONTENTS Volume 2 Number 2 a AMPHIBIAN & REPTILE CONSERVATION TNT ONAL AL DEVOTED 10. RLDWIDE PRESERVATION ND. i) RL OB AMPHIBIAN AND REPTILIAN DIVERSITY FOUNDER AND EDITOR Craig Masapakis ASSOCIATE EDITOR Sack W. Sites. Jr SPECIAL FEATURE ISSUE VENEZUELA ty reptiles 42 Distribution, species-richness, _. endemism, and conservation of et Venezuelan amphibians and 3 reptiles Jaime E. Péfaur and Juan A. Rivero Cover The polkadot tree frog (Hyla punctata) is DEPARTMENTS a common inhabitant of the largest South American ecosystem, the EDITORIAL Amazon, and it is also found within the borders of Venezuela. It dwells in both 40 Words from the editor primary and secondary humid forests . . and is common in marshy areas along Craig Hassapakis river borders, lakes, Ana flooded grasslands of lowland South America from Venezuela and Trinidad south to Authors the Paraguayan Chaco, east of the Andes mountains. This treefrog becomes almost entirely red at night. Their diet consists of small inver- tebrates. Photo kindly provided by Gail Shumway. Background screen photograph (see in color on page 69): A view of the inside of San Eusebio cloud forest, in the Venezuelan Andes. Tree ferns and bromelids are characteristics. Venezuela, Mérida. Photo: Jaime E. Péfaur. Scope: Amphibian and Reptile Conservation (ISSN: 1083-446X) [ARC] and the accompanying online edition (ISSN: 1525-9153) is a popularly accessible, peer-reviewed scientific journal of international scope, which is devoted to the worldwide preservation and management of amphibian and reptilian diversity. Online edition: The full-text online edition is available to subscribers FREE-OF-CHARGE as PDF (Portable Document Format) files through ingenta at: www. ingenta.com. The online edition may vary slightly from the print edition due to our reducing file sizes for efficient downloading over the Internet. Some background screens (photographs) are removed which are deemed not essential to the content of the article(s). There is also some loss of clarity to photographs in reducing article file sizes to a minimum. If clarity of photos is a problem, the print edition of the journal should be consulted. Audience: ARC is intended for a wide readership from nonprofessional to professional herpetologists, the general public, and scientists. Frequency: ARC publishes two issues per year (semi-annually). Focus: ARC concentrates on publishing timely information in the form of feature articles, original papers and data, reviews, reports, short communications, columns, commentaries, book reviews, editorials, and news and notes. Distribution: ARC is distributed worldwide by subscription as well as quality newsstands, bookstores, and select vendors. Delivery is guaranteed. ARC is also available as pay-for-view full-text articles online with ingenta. Included and available online at ingenta are full abstracts and complete bibliographic entries. Much of this same material plus more, such as FREE sample article(s), are available at the ARC website (www. herpetofauna.com). Publisher: Craig Hassapakis, Amphibian and Reptile Conservation 2525 Iowa Avenue. Modesto, California 95358-9467, USA. Fax: (509) 695-8747; email: publisher@herpetofauna.com; website: www. herpetofauna.com. Postmaster: Please send change of address to AR‘ } eight weeks prior to move. Copyright: All contents copyright © 2000 Amphibian and Reptile Conservation. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise without prior permission. Photocopying: ARC authorizes photocopying for internal or per use provided the appropriate fee is paid directly to the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc., 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, Massachusetts 01923-4599, USA. Tel: (978) 750-8400; fax: (978) 750-4470; \ www.copyright.com:; email: info@copyright.com. Communications: It is recommended that all correspondence be conducted via email: 4RC@herpetofauna.com whenever possible. All ot! correspondence should be directed to ARC using the contact information above under publisher. Subscriptions: All subscribers receive four consecutively distributed issues with a minimum of per year. Categories: Subscription rate categories are individual United States (US)$20 and institutional $40 (includes postage). All subscriptions outside the US include $7 for shipping anc li eg subscription rate (non-US rate: individual $27 and institutional $47). Single Issue Purchase: Subscriptions to the journal are encouraged to reduce shipping costs and paper work but some may wish to purchas¢ single issues as they become available. The cost for single copies is US$5.95 plus two dollars shipping within the United States. Outside the US please inquire about shipping costs. Pay-for-view met! securing articles online is available through ingenta at www.ingenta.com. Article price charge is $8 except for larger titles, which increase in price. Further pricing information available at inzenta. Back issues: Individual copies are available from the publisher for $12 each (Note: Volume 1, Number | is out-of-print). Facsimiles (photocopies) are available for $10 each once issues are out-of-print. Copies of individual articles can be purchased for $8 each except for articles covering an entire issue and these sell for the regular single-issue price. Donations: Contributions for the journal are gladly accepted. These specific resources are used to further the conservation of amphibians and reptiles. with the goals of the journal. Categories include: Friends of ARC $40, Supporting $60, Contributing $100, Patron $250, Sustaining $500, and Founder (includes lifetime subscription to ARC) $1,000. All other contributors, excluding Founders, receive four consecutively distributed issues. Payment: All journal orders must be paid in US currency drawn on a US bank (credit card, check, or international money order). Credit card payment: Cards accepted are Visa, Mastercard, Discover, and American Express. Website: www. herpetofauna.com. Production: Manufactured and printed in the United States of America using recycled paper (containing 10% post consumed fiber) and soy based inks. This paper meets the requirements of ANSI/NISO Z39.48-1992 (Recomfirmed 1997) [American National Standard for Permanence of Paper for Publications and Documents in Libraries and Archives]. Indexed by: BIOSIS Previews (includes Biological Abstracts) [w»wu:diosis. org]; EBSCO Online (www-us.ebsco.com/online); ingenta (www.ingenta.com); Maruzen Knowledgeworker (www.maruzen.co.jp/home/home.himly, Minerva Electronic ae Online Services (rive mirerva.at); Online Computer Library Center FirstSearch (www-ocle.orefirstsearch), RoweCom Information Quest (uww:eig.com); Swetsnet Navigator (www.swersblackwell.com), and Zoological Record (ww biosis.org). i A] ‘ISIMAIDYJO PPIs SSO/UN ANPJI aq awivge AOYIND ay Aq papiaosd SUOLDAISN]]1 Puv sydpasojoyd IV UIA [ atinvy fo dsa}inor ojoyd ‘odoyend ‘ejanzeue, :uolye907 ‘Nppiamneu eogopnasd Copyright © 2000 Amphibian and Reptile Conservation. All rights reserved. ARC authorizes Amphibian and Reptile Conservation 2(2):42-70. photocopying for internal or personal use provided the appropriate fee is paid directly to the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc., 222 Rosewood Dr., Danvers, MA 01923-4599, USA. Tel (978) 750-8400; fax: (978) 750-4470; email: info@copyright.com; website: www.copyright.com Distribution, species-richness, endemism, and conservation of Venezuelan amphibians and reptiles JAIME E. PEFAUR*2 AND JUAN A. RIVERO? ‘Ecologia Animal, Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad de Los Andes, Mérida, VENEZUELA *Departamento de Biologia, Universidad de Puerto Rico, Mayagiiez, PUERTO RICO Abstract.—This report assesses the macrodistribution of amphibian and reptile taxa, and compares the species-richness of the various biogeographical zones in which Venezuela is herein divided. The macrodistribution of 252 amphibians and 299 reptiles species was established for the eight defined biogeographical regions. On the basis of the presence or absence of species, these regions have been categorized into three units: a) those with fewer than 100 herpetological species (Maracaibo Lake, Lara-Falcén, and the Islands), b) those with more than 100 but less than 200 species (Andes, Coastal Range, Llanos, and Amazonas), and c) with more than 300 species (Guayana). An index of species-richness shows that some regions of Venezuela are among the most distinguished herpetological places worldwide; the Andes region is the highest with an index of 0.34. Endemics are given particular attention in the light of the current knowledge of the geographical distribution of every taxon. There are 181 amphibian and 119 reptile species endemic to Venezuela. In terms of conserva- tion, turtles and crocodiles are the most threatened species, but some frogs, particularly those of the highlands, are also endangered. The existence of protected areas, together with management and scientific projects designed to protect Venezuela’s amphibians and reptiles, and the increasing international concern for them, strengthen the hope of preserv- ing its valuable herpetofauna populations, and other animal resources, for future generations. Resumen.—La macrodistribucién de 252 especies de anfibios y 299 especies de reptiles fue establecida para las ocho regiones biogeograficas en las que Venezuela se divide corrientemente. Sobre la base de la presencia o ausencia de especies las regiones se han subdividido en tres unidades: a) las que tienen menos de 100 especies (Lago de Maracaibo, Lara-Falcén y las Islas), b) las que tienen mas de 100 pero menos de 200 especies (Andes, Cordillera de la Costa, Llanos, y Amazonas), y c) con mas de 300 especies (Guayana). El indice de riqueza de especies demuestra que algunas de las regiones de Venezuela estan entre las regiones herpetologicas mas notorias en el Ambito mundial; particularmente Los Andes sobresalen con un indice de 0.34. Se presta una atencion particular a las especies endémicas a la luz del actual conocimiento de la distribucién geografica de cada taxén. Hay 181 especies de anfibios y 119 especies de reptiles consideradas como endémicas en Venezuela. En términos de conservacion, las tortugas y los cocodrilos son los grupos mas amenazados, pero algunos anfibios, particularmente los de alturas, también estan en peligro debido a la declinacién numérica de sus poblaciones. La existencia de areas protegidas, unido a proyectos cientificos y de manejo disefados para proteger las especies amenazadas, y el aumento de la preocupaci6n internacional, fortalecen la esperanza de que estos recursos faunisticos puedan preservarse para futuras generaciones. Key words. Checklist, distribution, species-richness, endemism, conservation, Venezuela, amphibians, reptiles, herpetofauna Introduction sula, and along the coast, as well. The terrestrial boundaries of The great variety of ecosystems in South America has induced Venezuela are continuous with Colombia on the west and south- the development of a greatly diversified herpetofauna which is west, Guyana on the east, and Brazil on the south. The existence about a fourth of the total number of amphibian and reptile of many large rivers and mountain ranges help make the country species in the world. an environmental mosaic with a diverse fauna of amphibians and Venezuela is one of the 13 countries comprising South reptiles (Fig. 1). America. It lies in its northernmost portion and receives the This report assesses the macrodistribution of amphibian climatic influences of the Caribbean Sea and Atlantic Ocean. In and reptile taxa, and compares the species-richness and the the north and northwest it is encased by the Andean Cordillera faunistical similarity of the various biogeographical zone: which in the Mérida Andes may attain a height of 5000 m. The which the country is divided. Endemics are given particular 2 extensive savannas in the central portion and the Amazonian tention in the light of the current knowledge of the geographical forest of the south, contribute to a complex climate with an distribution of every taxon. Remarks on the conservation o1 abundance of rainfall throughout most of the country, although these faunas are discussed. there are drier areas in the region of Falcon, the Goajira Penin- Efforts have been made by several researchers to unravel the macrodistributional patterns of the diverse Venezuelan ver- *Correspondence. Fax: (58) (74) 401286; email: pefaur@ tebrate groups. The distributional pattern of fishes were de- ciens.ula.ve scribed by Mago-Leccia (1970); of amphibians by Rivero (1961, 43 VENEZUELA twice the size of California). It lies in the. ided into 24 states (political divisions), and’ water bodies exist. The climate is tropical, hot, and hursid in the ng the coast. Venezuela is one of the main producers of oil in the Is, s, hydropower and agricultural g goods, such as sugar cane, coffee, ten countries in regards to biodiver: sity worldwide fresh water fishes, about 250 species th about 20,000,000 inhabitants and. roblems, such as soil erosion and concern are mining operations station, urban and industrial pollution, rship are not clarified in law, and continued nomy thus, is of great environmental conservation by the government as vilderness intact and more than. Figure 1. Relief map of Venezuela. The density of the stippled areas shows land elevations. Only the larger rivers are shown. 1963a, b, c, 1964a, b, c), Duellman (1988), Frost (1985), and La Marca (1992); of reptiles by Roze (1966), Medem (1981, 1983), Pritchard and Trebbau (1984), and Lancini (1986); and of mammals by Eisenberg and Redford (1979) and Bodini and Pérez-Hernandez (1985). Some comprehensive studies on the herpetofauna from several areas of Venezuela have been provided by Staton and Dixon (1977), Duellman (1979), Hoogmoed (1979), Hoogmoed and Gorzula (1979), Rivero- Blanco and Dixon (1979), Péfaur and Diaz de Pascual (1982), 44 Durant and Diaz (1996), and Yustiz (1996). Many other contributions about the distribution of orders (1.e., Brame and Wake 1963), families (1.e., Dixon and Hendricks 1979), genera (i.e., Dixon 1980; Di Bernardo 1992; Péfaur 1993; Sefiaris et al. 1994), and/or species (1.e., Gallardo 1965, 1969; Dixon and Michaud, 1992) have been consulted. Additional references can be checked in Vanzolini (1978), Duellman and Trueb (1986), La Marca (1992), Péfaur (1992), and Duellman (1995), among others. VENEZUELAN AMPHIBIANS AND REPTILES Figure 2. Sketch map of Venezuela, showing the main biogeographical regions: |. Maracaibo Lake, II. Andes, Hl. Falcon-Lara, IV. Coastal Range, V. Llanos, VI. Guayana, VII. Amazonas, and VIII. Islands. Materials and methods In order to assess the distributional records of each species, a map of Venezuela with its herein defined biogeographical re- gions was used. A biogeographic sketch of Venezuela is pre- sented in Fig. 2. It contains the eight biogeographical zones commonly accepted for the country. This physiographic en- semble takes into account mainly the relief, climate, and vegeta- tion (Marrero 1964; Ewel and Madriz 1968; Huber and Alarcon 1988). Although the boundaries of each region are not well de- fined, especially in some ecological nodules, they serve our pur- poses well. Different researchers have used this framework for their studies (Rivero 1963, 1964; Eisenberg and Redford 1979; Bisbal 1988; Péfaur and Rivero 1989). The extent of each region is shown in Table 1. The land bordering Maracaibo Lake corresponds to Region I, which is covered by seasonally dry tropical forest in the north and by tropical lowland rain forest in the south. Wetlands also cover an extensive section of this region representing more than 3,500,000 ha. The southern extent of the Maracaibo Lake region is bor- dered by Region II, corresponding to the elevated mountains of the Cordillera de Mérida, and by the Cordillera de Perija, on the northwest. Both ranges comprise the Andes region. For this 45 study, all lands above 500 m are considered within the Andean unit and its biota as Andean; lands below 500 m are considered as piedmont. The Andes are environmentally complex (Ewel and Madriz 1968; Diaz et al. 1997), and may include premontane, dry and humid forests, montane wet and cloud forests, xero- phytic valleys, hot and dry landscapes, and the impressive Paramos, highland tundras, occurring above 3000 m. This region covers about 4,200,000 ha of the country’s surface. The Falcon-Lara region or Region III also borders the northeastern part of the Maracaibo Lake region. This land is affected by the easterly drying winds of the Caribbean Sea and exhibit mostly a xerophytic landscape, catalogued as premontane dry shrub or dry forest. A large portion of the north sealine of Venezuela is bordered by the Coastal Range (Region IV), made up of forested mountains, with elevations up to 2765 m, and covered by premontane tropical rain and montane cloud forests. The Andes and the Coastal Range, slo] down into the lowlands of the Llanos, Region V, which extends to the Orinoco River in the south, to the border with Colombia on the west, and extending to the Orinoco River delta in the east. The approximately 27,000,000 ha of the Llanos are cov- ered by savannas or extensive prairies intermingled with dry Plate 3 Sinead . ' Plate 5 Plate 6 Plate captions: 2. Atelopus carbonerensis. Once very abundant, this bufonid frog is now extinct from the Andean cloud forests. Venezuela, Mérida. 3. Bufo granulosus. An inhabitant of all Venezuelan biogeographical zones. Venezuela, Aragua. 4. Bufo marinus. One of the largest toads from Venezuela and the one with the largest distribution; it remains abundant country wide. Venezuela, Tachira. 5. Bufo typhonius. Venezuela, Guatopo. Photo courtesy of Laurie J. Vitt. 6. Dendrobates leucomelas. This attractive frog is found in the southern part of the country, south of the Orinoco River. Venezuela, Bolivar. 46 VENEZUELAN AMPHIBIANS AND REPTILES Table 1. Extent of land surface and number of life zones present in the biogeographical regions of Venezuela. (Source: Bisbal 1988; Ewel and Madriz 1968.) Estimated land surface Biogeographical region km? % Number of Life Zones I Maracaibo Lake 35,000 3.88 5 Il Andes 42,000 4.66 16 Hl Falcon-Lara 30,000 33.333) 6 IV Coastal Range 68,000 7.54 10 V Llanos 270,000 29.95 3 Vi Guayana 350,000 38.82 10 Vil Amazonas 105,000 11.65 Dy Vill Islands 1,500 0.17 Total 901,500 100.00 22 Table 2. Surface of altitudinal belts in Venezuela. (Source: Ewel and Madriz 1968.) Area Altitudinal belt km? % Tropical lowlands 640,283 71.30 Premontane 227,390 25.00 Low montane 27,987 3.05 Montane 4,570 0.52 Subalpine and alpine 1,270 0.13 Total 901,500 100.00 forests and riverine gallery forests. The largest biogeographical region of Venezuela is the Guayana, Region VI, which includes about 35,000,000 ha, most of which are part of the Venezuelan Guayana shield. The landscape is complex, including lowland, premontane and montane wet and rain forests; savannas; and wet oases, called morichales, rich in palms and herpetofauna. The land- scape is defined by profound valleys bordered by fepuys, table mountain remains of geological lands of the Precam- brian-Paleozoic era. The area belonging to the Orinoco River’s delta is also included in this region. Some 10,500,000 ha of tropical forests covering the lowlands of the upper Orinoco River basin comprise Region VII, Amazonas, which is continuous with South America’s large green core, the Amazonia. An important part of this area is covered by wet tropical forest. A small portion of the country is made up of islands. All of them.are included in Region VIII, which for the purpose of the distribution of turtles also includes the Venezuelan Carib- bean Sea. This region is included to call attention to the par- ticular distribution of the island herpetofauna, especially that of Isla Margarita, as well as maritime herpetofauna. Each of these biogeographical regions is ecologically di- verse and complex. In their ecological map, Ewel and Madriz (1968) described 22 life zones for Venezuela (Table 1). The most homogeneous biogeographical region, Amazonas, has only two life zones, and the most complex of all, the Andes, includes 16 life zones in its relatively small territory. Diver- sity of ecosystems is proportional to the steepness of ver- sants, the sides of the mountains, in the tropics, but most of Venezuela is lowland. About three-fourths of the country is comprised of lands below 500 m; lands above 1000 m do not 47 exceed 10% of the territory, yet these are the most ecologi- cally diverse of all (Table 2), a situation with strong conse- quences on the biological features of the country. Several methods have been used to obtain the data pre- sented in this paper: museum records, bibliographic informa- tion, and personal observations. Reports made on the hold- ings of relevant museums in Venezuela, Puerto Rico, Colom- bia, Brazil, France, and the United States have been taken into account, but in most instances they have been improved with notes taken by the authors during their trips and mu- seum visits. In order to update previous reports on the Ven- ezuelan amphibians and reptiles (Péfaur 1992; Péfaur and Rivero 1989), new lists had to be produced. To the best of our knowledge the checklist database (Appendix |) contains all known species up to December 31, 1996. The distributional aspects of the list are given by the presence or absence of data for every species in a biogeo- graphical region. The eight regions were thus delimited by the known information regarding the species’ geographical distri- bution. The number of species present 1n a region is an indi- cation of its species diversity and of the geological, climato- logical, and biological evolution of the faunal elements con- cerned. However, the index of species-richness, rather than the simple number of species, is a better expression of evolu- tionary trends. A Species-Richness Index (SRI) was calcu- lated by considering the number of extant species divided b the area multiplied by (x) 100. To obtain the faunistical sit larity between regions, a four-fold contingency table wa ated for every pair of compared regions and the Dice coeffi- cient, as shown by Hayek (1994), was calculated. Endemism, an ecological term, was determined by find- ing whether there was a unique relationship between a spe- cre- JAIME E. PEFAUR AND JUAN A. RIVERO Table 3. Taxonomic composition of the Venezuelan herpetofauna. Class/Order Common name Amphibia Anura Frogs and toads Caudata Salamanders Gymnophiona Caecilians Subtotal Reptilia Testudines Turtles and tortoises Crocodylia Crocodiles and alligators Amphisbaenia Amphisbaenians Lacertilia Lizards Serpentes Snakes Subtotal Total Table 4. Allocation of amphibian and reptile species in the biogeographical regions of Venezuela. Taxa I Il Frogs 18 72 Salamanders 0 ] Caecilians 2 2 Turtles 6 1 Crocodiles l 0 Amphisbaenians ] 2 Lizards 20 26 Snakes 44 38 Total 92 142 Families Genera Species 10 42 238 ] 1 2 3 i] 12 14 50 252 fi 14 23 2 6 1 2 6 8 37 113 8 56 151 26 112 299 40 162 551 Biogeographical region nie Hl IV Vv Vi Vil Vill Total 17 63 36 124) 53 5 238 0 ] 0 0 0 0 2 ] 2 0 7 2 0 12 3 6 9 13 1] 6 23 ] 2 2 3 5 ] 6 Ds 2 2 5 4 0 6 25 39 19 59 36 16 113 47 75 43 96 74 Oe 151 96 190 111 310 185 50 551 Table 5. Species-Richness Index (SRI) value calculations for herpetofaunal species in the biogeographical regions of Venezuela. SRI = (Species number/area) x 100. The area to calculate the Index is provided in Table 1. Biogeographic Amphibian species Reptile species Total Total region n SRI SRI n SRI I 20 0.05 72 0.20 92 0.26 ll 75 0.18 67 0.16 142 0.34 Hl 18 0.06 78 0.26 96 0.32 IV 66 0.10 124 0.18 190 0.28 V 36 0.01 75 0.03 111 0.04 Vi 134 0.04 176 0.05 310 0.09 Vil 55 0.05 130 0.12 185 0.18 Total 252 0.03 299 0.03 551 0.06 cies and a geographical region. As used in this study, when- ever a species dwelled and apparently originated in a single region, it was considered a biological endemic. However, if a species was considered endemic because it occupied a single region in Venezuela but also extended into another country, it was considered as a political endemic with respect to the first country. In the case of Venezuela, there are mainly biological endemics, but there are also several political endemics, that 48 is, species extending beyond the boundaries to some neigh- boring countries, such as Colombia, Brazil, and/or Guyana in the mainland, or Trinidad-Tobago, and the Dutch Islands (Bonaire, Aruba, Curag¢ao), in the Caribbean Sea. To determine the conservation status of the herpe- tofauna, only a few quantitative assessments are available. Thus, a general impression rather than an accurate census supports the cataloging for the species considered. Plate 7 Plate 8 Plate 9 7 Plate 10 Plate 11 Plate 12 Plate 13 Plate 14 Plate captions: 7. Mannophryne collaris. The ventral side of the females of this species present a black collar and a yellow gular region. Venezuela, Mérida. 8. Nephelobates alboguttatus. A very abundant species in the past, today it has disappeared from their geographical range. Venezuela, Mérida. 9. Nephelobates haydeeae. This frog is found only in the western state of Tachira, where its populations are declining. Venezuela, Tachira. 10. Nephelobates meridensis. This was the largest dendrobatid frog of western Venezuela. This species is probably extinct. Venezuela, Mérida. 11. Nephelobates serranus. A very restricted frog, inhabiting only a part of the Sierra Nevada mountains. Venezuela, Mérida. 12. Flectonotus pygmaeus. A marsupial frog that inhabits the northern mountains. Venezuela, Mérida. 13. Hyla crepitans. This species dwells in most environments in the country. It remains very common. Probably conforms a taxonomical group of related species. Venezuela, Tachira. 14. Hyla lanciformis. This large and slender brown frog has a wide distribution in the country. Venezuela, Tachira. | =< JAIME E. PEFAUR AND JUAN A. RIVERO Table 6. Matrix of amphibian similarity among Venezuelan biogeographical regions. Note: This matrix shows in bold the amount of species of every region. Above the diagonal line are the similarity values between a pair of regions, while under it are the numbers of shared species. (Source of data: Appendix 1.) REGION I i il IV Vv vl vil | 20 0.15 0.32 0.26 0.43 0.17 0.27 R i 7 5 0.15 0.18 0.18 0.11 0.15 E MT 6 7 18 0.33 0.33 0.14 0.22 4 IV i 13 14 66 0.45 0.25 0.28 o| Vv 12 i 9 24 36 0.36 0.46 N/} vi 13 12 in 25 31 134 0.40 17 Table 7. Matrix of reptile similarity among Venezuelan biogeographical regions. Note: See comments under Table 6. (Source of data: Appendix 1.) REGION | Il ill IV Vv Vi Vil I 72 0.47 0.64 0.56 0.52 0.30 0.32 R Il 33 67 0.51 0.44 0.37 0.42 0.24 = Hl 48 Si] 78 0.66 0.58 0.37 0.39 A IV 55 42 66 124 0.56 0.47 0.46 Oo V 38 26 44 56 75 0.56 0.62 N Vi 37 28 47 ial 65 176 0.72 vil 32 24 4] 59 59 110 130 Table 8. Number of endemic species and percentage of endemism in the herpetofauna of the biogeographic regions of Venezuela. (Source Data: Appendix 1.) Amphibians Reptiles me Regions Species by region Endemics % Species by region Endemics % | 20 4 DD: 2 12 10.1 Il 75 Sy7/ 31.5 67 20 16.8 Ml 18 0 0.0 78 5 4.2 IV A 66 82 17.7 124 19 16.0 Vv 36 l 0.6 75 2 tod. Vi 134 75 41.4 176 48 40.3 Vil 55 12 6.6 130 13 10.9 Country’s total 252 181 60.3 299 119 39.7 Results toises have 23 species contained within seven families. Crocodiles and alligators have six species belonging to two Taxonomic composition families. The amphisbaenians are represented by only two The herpetological component of the Venezuelan fauna con- genera and six species. The lizards have 113 species com- sists of 551 species of which 252 are amphibians and 299 are prising eight families, with Gonatodes as its most specious reptiles. A taxonomic list of species is provided by a country genus, with 13 species. Snakes make up the most diversi- checklist (Appendix 1) and summarized in Table 3. The am- fied group with 151 species belonging to eight families. Its phibians of Venezuela are included in three orders, of which largest family, the Colubridae, contains 104 species. All the largest is Anura. The most specious family is Hylidae, other families of this class have less than 40 species each. containing 77 species, followed by Leptodactylidae with 72 Its most specious genus is Afractus with 16 species; other species. Other rather large families are Bufonidae, quite large genera are Liophis and Micrurus with 10 and 12 Centrolenidae, and Dendrobatidae. The rest of the frog families species, respectively. have a very low number of species. The families of salamanders and caecilians are also of minor number. Distribution The reptiles are comprised within five orders of which The distribution of every species in the eight biogeographical the largest are Serpentes and Lacertilia. Turtles and tor- regions, as considered in Appendix 1, is summarized in Table 4. 50 VENEZUELAN AMPHIBIANS AND REPTILES By far, the largest assemblage of amphibians and reptile species is found in Region VI, Guayana, followed by the Coastal Range, Amazonas, and the Andes. The lowest number of spe- cies in the country is found in the northern regions of Maracaibo Lake and Falcon-Lara. In the maritime islands region there are 50 species of amphibians and reptiles. Species-richness As surface area differences among the biogeographical divisions do not allow a direct comparison of the biodiversity by the number of herpetofaunal species alone, an index (SRI) 1s re- quired to more accurately express the results. The SRI index values are shown in Table 5. The country itself has a low value for the index, 0.06. However, the four smallest regions achieve the highest SRI and the opposite three largest regions have the lowest indexes. Faunistic similarity The herpetological similarity between the different biogeographi- cal regions of Venezuela is presented in Table 6 and 7. Similarity based on amphibian species 1s rather low (Table 6); the least pair bound of regions is the Andes-Guayana, which share 12 species and have a similarity value of 0.11; the strongest bound is the Llanos-Amazonas pair, which have 21 species, with a similarity value of 0.46, followed by the Llanos-Coastal Range and LI- anos-Maracaibo Lake pairs. : Regional similarity based on the reptile component of the fauna produces different results (Table 7). In general, the simi- larity region based on reptile species has higher values than when amphibians are considered. Here, the least similar pair region is the Andes-Amazonas, with a similarity value of 0.24, while the strongest bounded pair is Guayana-Amazonas, with 110 shared species and a similarity value of 0.72. Endemism There are 181 species of amphibians and 119 of reptiles consid- ered to be biological and/or political endemics (Table 8). Overall there are more endemic species among the amphibians than among reptiles. However, four regions have less endemic amphibians than endemic reptiles. The Andes, the Coastal Range, and the Guayana are the places with more endemics in both taxa. Conservation Actual data on the conservation status of the herpetofauna is relatively scarce in Venezuela. The most relevant information on population status is provided by Ramo (1982), Praderio (1985), Silva et al. (1985), Péfaur and Diaz de Pascual (1987), Péfaur et al. (1987), Silva and Valdéz (1989), La Marca and Reinthaler (1991), Thorbjarnarson (1991), Péfaur and Pérez (1995), and Durant and Diaz (1996), among others. The Red Data Book of Venezuela (Rodriguez and Rojas-Suarez 1995) was helpful in establishing herpetofauna endangerment status. The report elaborated by the senior author to the Declining Amphibian Populations Task Force (DAPTF) of The World Conservation Union [IUCN] (in Vial and Saylor 1993), on the declining status of amphibians was also used to generate a list of endangered species (Appendix 2). Several species of amphib- ians, among which there are seven species of Bufonidae (5 Atelopus, 2 Oreophrynella), four Centrolenidae (2 Centrolene, 2 Hyalinobatrachium), 15 Dendrobatidae (5 Colostethus, 2 Mannophryne, and 8 Nephelobates), five Hylidae (1 Gastrotheca, 51 4 Hyla), one Allophrynidae (1 Allophryne), seven Leptodactylidae (2 Ceratophrys, 3 Eleutherodactylus, | Leptodactylus, | Pseudopaludicola), and two Plethodontidae (2 Bolitoglossa) are reported as having a decline in their population numbers and thus species of special concern. Among reptiles there are several species on the verge of extinction, such as Crocodylus intermedius, C. acutus, Caiman niger, and Podocnemis expansa, as well as all the sea turtles. Discussion Taxonomic composition The taxonomy of the Venezuelan herpetofauna changes con- tinuously due to new research findings and systematic rear- rangements. Substantial changes in the number of known spe- cies for every region have taken place in Venezuela during recent years. Descriptions of numerous new taxa have occurred in the last decades mainly among amphibians (Péfaur 1985; Rivero 1982a, b, 1985; Ayarzagiiena 1992, among others). Important changes have recently been introduced to the tax- onomy of the country’s herpetofauna thus, changing the sys- tematic scenery. Among frogs, the Centrolenid family has been divided into several genera (Centrolene, Cochranella, and Hyalinobatrachium) by Ruiz-Carranza and Lynch (1991). The Dendrobatidae was also generically rearranged with the intro- duction of Epipedobates and Minyobates by Myers (1987), Aromobates by Myers et al. (1991), and Mannophryne and Nephelobates by La Marca (1995). The Hylidae has also suf- fered some modification with the rearrangement of some Ololygon into the resurrected genus Scinax (Duellman and Wiens 1992), and the elaboration of a new genus Tepuihyla by Ayarzagtiena et al. (1992b). Among the caecilians, a general taxonomic rearrangement of families and genera was proposed by Nussbaum and Wilkinson (1989) and Wilkinson (1996). Among the reptiles, there have also been some taxonomic changes. Within the lizards, Iguanidae was divided into several families (Corytophanidae, Iguanidae, Polychrotidae, and Tropiduridae) by Frost and Etheridge (1989), while the genus Anolis was divided into five genera, of which two are present in Venezuela, Dactyloa and Norops (Savage and Guyer 1989). The Teiidae was also divided into two units, Gymnophthalmidae (small te1ids) and Teiidae [macroteiids] (Presch 1980). Within the snake group, some colubrid genera have been revised modi- fying the taxonomy for the Venezuelan members; for instance, Dixon (1989) reviewed Liophis and other associated genera. Among the Crotalidae there was also a strong change with the partitioning of Bothrops into several genera: Bothriechis, Bothriopsis, Bothrops, and Porthidium, with considerable effect to the Venezuelan fauna (Campbell and Lamar 1989). Of course, classification will continue to change as it is a dynamic science, and new systems and names will be introduced changing subse- quent lists of Venezuelan amphibian and reptile species. All systematic allocations and changes should be taken as tempo- rary arrangements that will be modified by the collection of new data and insights by researchers. Distribution There is no single area in Venezuela where an amphibian an areptile species is not present. From the most luxurious tropical wet forest of Amazonas to the vegetationally depauperate Paramos at the top of the Andean mountains, where numerous Plate 16 eh ae eee Plate 18 Plate 19 Plate 21 Plate 2 Plate captions: 15. Hyla luteocellata. Venezuela, Guatopo. Photo courtesy of Janalee P. Caldwell. 16. Hyla microcephala. This small frog has one of the largest biogeographical distribution in northern South America. Venezuela, Trujillo. 17. Hy/la vigilans. One of the smallest frogs of the country; inhabits the Lago de Maracaibo Zone. Venezuela, Zulia. 18. Phyllomedusa trinitatis. Venezuela Guatopo. Photo courtesy of Laurie J. Vitt. 19. Scinax rostratus. A medium sized frog with a distribution along the northern lowlands. Venezuela, Mérida. 20. Eleutherodactylus lancinii. An inhabitant of the paramos cold streams. Venezuela, Mérida. 21. Eleutherodatylus lentiginosus. A small frog from the Andes versants. Venezuela, Mérida. 22. Eleutherodactylus vanadise. A small frog occurring in the cloud forests of the Venezuelan Andes. Venezuela, Mérida. al ¢ : ~ 28h X ue ee eee a Plate 2 Plate 25 a 7 = Plate 26 Plate 27 Can oh le Plate 28 Plate 29 Plate 30 Plate captions: 23. Leptodactylus wagneri. A very elusive frog from most Andean environments, that can be detected by its ps r call. Venezuela, Mérida. 24. Pleurodema brachyops. One of the most popular frogs in the country by its color and dots in the rear | the body. Venezuela, Portuguesa. 25. Pipa pipa. This aquatic frog lives in the Llanos of Venezuela and Colombia. The picture shows a museum specimen with eggs imbedded in its back. Venezuela, Barinas. 26. Rana palmipes. A typical frog from the lowlands of western Venezuela but that can occasionally seen in the forested valleys of the Andes. Venezuela, Tachira. 27. Pseudis paradoxus. This medium sized frog is to be found in the marshes of the country’s lowlands. Venezuela, Apure. 28. Bolitoglossa orestes. One of salamanders that dwells in the cloud forests of the Andes. Venezuela, Mérida. 29. Caecilia subnigricans. A worm-like amphibian of northern Venezuela, that extends its range into Colombia. Venezuela, Tachira. 30. Rhinoclemmys punctularia. This small turtle inhabits the Lake of Maracaibo region. Venezuela, Zulia. JAIME E. PEFAUR AND JUAN A. RIVERO frogs and lizards species dwell (Hoogmoed 1979; Rivero-Blanco and Dixon 1979; Durant and Diaz 1996; Diaz et al. 1997), species abound; however, snakes have not invaded the paramos (Péfaur and Diaz de Pascual 1982; Diaz et al. 1997). Different physiological and behavioral adjustments are found in the fauna of each ecosystem, to cope with the contrasting climatological factors impinging on every zone. Several of the more notewor- thy adaptive strategies are the development of several unique reproductive modes: developing eggs and tadpoles in tree cavi- ties or bromeliads, or eggs on dorsum of females, or tadpoles carried on dorsum of males, such as occur in anurans (Duellman 1985), or the use of collective nest deposits under rocks, as occurs in the lizards of the Paramos. Newly discovered and new locality records of species have changed the known distributional patterns for many amphibians and reptiles. For instance, in the Andean region, species totals have changed from 16 frog, 4 lizard, and 10 snake species (as reported by Duellman 1979), to 56 frog and 15 lizard species (as reported by Péfaur and Diaz de Pascual 1982), to 72 frog, 26 lizard, and 38 snake species reported in this study. The well-documented work by Lancini (1986) reports 133 snake species for the country to 151 species reported here. Our knowledge of the distribution of the Ven- ezuelan amphibians and reptiles is quite acceptable at the present time, but an increase could be expected as new data is being collected all the time by researchers in the field. Both the Andes and the Guayana regions have been actively ex- plored by groups of researchers from the University of Los Andes in Mérida and from Museo de Ciencias La Salle in Caracas, respectively (Ayarzagtiena et al. 1992a, b; Péfaur 1993; Sefiaris et al. 1994; Durant and Diaz 1996), while ac- tive research on the herpetofauna of the Coastal Range is underway by researchers from Central University, Museum of the Agrarian Zoology Institution in Maracay (Manzanilla et al. 1995, 1996). The distributional range of certain species is of concern. There is a dramatic difference between the distribution of some taxa extending over the whole country (e.g., Bufo marinus, Hyla crepitans) compared to the punctual distribu- tion of those tepui-associated taxa (e.g., Oreophrynella huberi, O. vasquezi), or the narrow distribution of dendrobatids in the Mérida Andes. Many examples of these are known in any biogeographical region. The fast change in the Venezuelan landscapes will have a severe impact in the distribution of the herpetofauna. In less than half a century most forests in Region I have been cut down and replaced by prairies. Amphibian species prevail in the south, while reptiles dominate the north. In general, most, but mainly the xerophytic fauna, 1s shared with that of xeric Region III, a relationship extending to the rich and large val- ley of the Colombian Magdalena river. The valley of the Catatumbo river might have played a role in acting as a pass- way between the faunas of these regions. The existence of many humid environments in the Andes (Region II) permits the presence of a large number of frog species (Duellman 1979; Péfaur and Diaz de Pascual 1982). This region has few biogeographical contacts with other parts of the country, although it has served as a passway for dis- persing faunas (Péfaur and Pérez 1995; Rivero 1979; Rivero and Solano 1977). Something similar occurs in the wet and elevated lands of Region IV, the Coastal Range. The Andes do not have within them any important large geographical bar- 54 rier, but there are rich microclimates that act as ecological refuges. In the Coastal Range region, however, there are at least two well differentiated kinds of lands: wet elevated and xerophytic lowlands close to the Caribbean Sea (Rivero 1964a; Manzanilla et al. 1995, 1996). Moreover, an important selec- tive biogeographical barrier has acted in this region, as is the case of the Unare river valley, where many herpetofauna spe- cies distributions are discontinued past this point, such as Colostethus mandelorum, L. insularum, and Eleutherodactylus terraebolivaris, among others (Rivero 1964a; La Marca 1992). In the Llanos (Region V) there exists a fairly large her- petological fauna, which is common with the other regions (Staton and Dixon 1977; Rivero-Blanco and Dixon 1979; Péfaur and Diaz de Pascual 1987). The Llanos are climati- cally and vegetationally homogeneous at the macrogeograph- ical level, although they are intermingled with a web of ri- parian forest communicating with the other surrounding re- gions. Bordered by the Orinoco river in the south, this re- gion does not separate faunistically from Regions VI and ViI—the largest Venezuelan river seems not to be a selec- tive biogeographical barrier for amphibians and reptiles (Rivero 1961). The southern regions of Venezuela, Guayana and Amazonas (Regions VI and VII) are closer associated with the Amazonian sector of South America than with the north- ern areas of the country. The geological changes, the climate, the topography, and the diverse vegetation make these two areas the richest in herpetofauna species. This is especially true of the Guayana where a multitude of habitats facilitate the process of evolution. With the exception of salamanders and crocodilians, the taxa are more numerous in the Guayana, than in any other region. For the rest of the groups, the num- ber is almost double in the Guayana, as compared to any of the other biogeographical regions. The ecological complexity of this region has played several roles in the evolution of the biota. On the one hand, it has constituted a selective barrier for the extension of some faunal elements from the Brazilian Amazonian lowlands to the Llanos of Venezuela and vice versa; on the other hand, it is the seat for many endemic species (Hoogmoed 1979; this study). At the same time, it has shared species with other regions of Venezuela and Brazil (Avila-Pires 1995). One particular exception is Leptodactylus labyrinthicus. This species lives north and south of this re- gion, leaving a distributional hiatus in the Guayana shield (Péfaur and Sierra 1995). Depending on the total number of species present in each region, three categories of regions can be proposed: a) those with less than 100 species, comprised by the Maracaibo Lake, the Lara-Falcon, and the Islands regions; b) those with more than 100 but less than 200 species, which includes the Andes, the Coastal Range, Llanos, and Amazonas; and c) with more than 300 species, represented by the Guayana region. Moreover, the limits of every biogeographical region, are very imprecise. For instance, there is a sector where Re- gions II, HI, and V converge, and thus there is an uncertainty about the region to which some species belong. Another bio- geographical nodule is the sector where Regions III and IV merge. There is greater need for a more detailed analysis of presence species in these conflicting sectors. On the other hand, collecting records are very scarce in the Cordillera de Perija in western Venezuela and the Orinoco delta region in eastern Venezuela. It is possible that the Delta might be con- VENEZUELAN AMPHIBIANS AND REPTILES sidered a separate biogeographical region when more biologi- cal information is gathered and analyzed. Species-richness The faunistic richness of an area would be better expressed by an Index of Species-Richness (SRI) that takes into account both the area and the number of species. In essence, this index is a species-density index—that is, at the same number of species, those biogeographical areas with small surfaces will have higher values in SRI than areas with larger surfaces. SRI numbers allow the comparison of any area or region of the world with respect to species-richness. In the case of Venezu- ela, its large size and the existence of extensive territories, such as the Llanos, with a low number of species, account for a low SRI value (0.06), similar to the one known for the Yucatan Peninsula in Mexico (Lee 1980). This statistical artifact warns about the use of such index for countries with a high diversity of landscapes, but to use it for particular regions on small countries. For instance, among published data, Oaxaca in Mexico has an SRI value of 0.37 and is usually considered one of the richest herpetological regions in the world (Casas-Andreu et al. 1996), whereas Costa Rica has been reported as having the largest SRI value (0.71) in the world (Johnson 1989). If both amphibians and reptiles are analyzed together, the highest SRI value is found in the Andes, followed by the Falcon-Lara region. The SRI values of 0.34 and 0.32, respec- tively (Table 8), are distinguished even when compared to the SRI richest regions of the world. When the analysis is carried out separately for amphibian species, the Andes is the only region that stands out as the most diverse region. This rela- tively small area, with several elevational belts and an abun- dance of humidity and wet life zones, has a condensed den- sity of amphibian species. In turn, when the reptile fauna is analyzed separately, the largest value 1s found in Region III (Falcon-Lara), which is also a small area covered with xero- phytic vegetation—a fitting place for reptiles. Faunistic similarity Similarity is a concept that brings together biogeographical ele- ments and evolutionary aspects of the fauna. In the comparison of the seven regions of Venezuela, all obtained values for am- phibians are under 0.50, indicating a low degree of species shared between biogeographical regions. The most similar amphibian faunas are those of Regions IV-V and V-VI]—the values of their similarity indexes are the highest (0.45 and 0.46, respectively). It is not a surprise to find these relationships, for there is a geographical continuity between these regions, but what is Table 9. Causes of amphibian population decline. |. Environmental changes due to human activity a) Destruction and/or fragmentation of habitats b) Agriculture frontier expansion c) Inadequate use of plaguicides d) Water pollution e) Ozone’s cover destruction or weakness f) Acid rain g) Introduction of predator and/or competitor species h) Expansion and/or introduction of diseases 55 biogeographically relevant is the high similarity between the Llanos and the Maracaibo Lake region, which are separated by ranges and dry lands, but that share some species with disjunct distributions such as Leptodactylus bolivianus, L. wagneri, Physalaemus pustulosus, and Pseudis paradoxa, among others. On the other hand, elements of Region II differ considerably from the other areas, an indication of the greater amphibian independence of the Andes with respect to the other regions in Venezuela. A similar pattern is provided by the Guayana region, which exhibits an independence as a biotic source. Because reptile species usually have a rather ample distri- bution, the number of shared species and the similarity values are higher in this group than in the amphibians. The overall similarity values are higher, especially between Regions VI and VIL, and with the lowest level between the Andes and Amazonas. Considering the reptiles, the Andes does not stands out as a faunistically independent region because of this region’s rela- tively strong relationships to the Maracaibo Lake and Falcon- Lara regions. Endemism The formation of new animal species, as the result of genetic and ecological processes, has been one of the major evolutionary features in many areas of Venezuela. Wherever the distribution of a species is reduced in space, an endemism process is at work. Herpetological endemism is different in the several biogeo- graphical zones of Venezuela. The Andes and the Guayana are the regions with the highest percentages of amphibian endemics, most of them biological endemics, reflecting an active speciation process, something that has been acknowledged in other animal groups (Brown et al. 1974). On one side, at the Andes there has been an active process of contraction and expansion of forests as consequence of the glaciation periods, and on the other side, at the Guayana, there has been an appearance of different vegeta- tional formations oriented by a long history of erosive changes. In the Coastal Range almost half of the amphibian species are biological endemics, too. The fact that most amphibian endemics are found in elevated lands is evidence favoring the close rela- tionship between abundance of life zones and diversity of am- phibians. The Andes has 16 life zones, and both the Coastal Range and the Guayana regions have 10 each. The situation is different with the reptiles. Though there are 119 species in the country considered as biological or politi- cal endemics, only one region has a greatest number of endemics, the Guayana, with 40% of their total species endemic. Reptiles are less restricted to a geographical place and have a wider eco- logical tolerance, thus extending their distributions into different ll. Environmental changes due to astronomic factors a) Global climatic changes 1) in temperature patterns 2) in precipitation and relative humidity patterns b) Ultraviolet radiation increases c) Not-yet-evaluated factors 1) Cosmic dust impact 2) Micrometeors 3) X-rays 4) Gamma-rays Plate 31 a ) Plate 32 Plate 36 : Plate 37 Plate 38 Plate captions: 31. Geochelone carbonaria. A common and popular turtle. Most peasants rise this species as food and pet. Venezuela, Guarico. 32. Thecadactylus rapicaudus. A gekkonid lizard with an ample distribution in the country. Venezuela, Mérida. 33. Norops nitens. Venezuela, Guatopo. Photo courtesy of Laurie J. Vitt. 34. Polychrus marmoratus. A chameleon-type lizard, common in the wet forests. Venezuela, Aragua. 35. Anadia bitaeniata. A member of a taxonomically very complex group of lizards from the Andean paramos and cloud forests. Venezuela, Mérida. 36. Gymnophthalmus speciosus. One of the smallest lizards; it lives in the litter of most types of forests. Venezuela, Mérida. 37. Ameiva bifrontata. A medium sized lizard with an ample distribution in the lowlands. Venezuela, Tachira. 38. Cnemidophorus lemniscatus. A ground dwelling lizard that probably has the largest distribution in all ecological zones of the country. Venezuela, Zulia. VENEZUELAN AMPHIBIANS AND REPTILES regions and life zones within a region. The Falcon-Lara and the Llanos have the smallest numbers of endemics in the country. These areas are macroenvironmentally homogenous, not favoring speciation as much as in heterogeneous elevated lands with unstable environments. Both regions do not have strong biogeographical barriers; this translates into a more extensive sharing of herpetological species between bordering re- gions. We hypothesize that any zoological taxa will have fewer endemic species in the lands of Falcon-Lara or the Llanos of Venezuela. The Maracaibo Lake Region is unusual, as the amphib- ian endemic numbers are quite low compared to the reptile en- demic species and can be explained by the extensive dry lands. The finding of only a low number of amphibian endemics in Amazonas is probably due to insufficient research in its territory. Exemplified by the literature, animal groups exhibit more endemics at elevated lands primarily due to isolation. For in- stance, when the mammalian fauna, bats excluded, is studied, the Andes region shows the largest percentage of endemic species of terrestrial mammals (Eisenberg and Redford 1979). Supposedly, any taxon closely associated with a geographical territory (as opposed to a loose association, as in bats, birds, flying insects, etc.) has experienced a high degree of speciation in the Andes, mainly due to the glaciation processes during the Pleistocene (Schubert and Vivas 1993) and the corresponding vegetational responses of expansion and contractions (Duellman 1982). A general review is needed, but the preliminary work by Diaz et al. (1997) seems to be an indication that this actually occurs. Conservation Venezuela has a human population with a high degree of envi- ronmental concern, but it is also a country with a rather strong push for development. This contradictory situation has statisti- cal expressions in the high and rapid destruction of natural envi- ronments, with a rate of 600,000 ha of deforestation yearly and the existence, at the present time, of 43 National Parks, two Biosphere Reserves, and seven Wildlife Refuges (MARNR 1992). Such a great number of protected areas should help to conserve the herpetofauna within their limits. Unfortunately, actual study cases on the decline of animal populations are few (Ojasti 1967; La Marca and Reinthaler 1991). Few documented cases are known where herpetological species have been known to be on the verge of extinction or have verifiable population declines. Undoubtedly, the large reptiles have been the most affected by an extractive commerce (e.g., collecting for the skin trade, meat consumption) developed prior to the 1980s when several regulations were established. Today strict regulations are in action to protect crocodiles and turtles. Amphibians are also imperiled, as can be derived from the provided list of endangered species (Appendix 2). As in many other places of the world (Blaustein and Wake 1990), a decima- tion of amphibians population is occurring in the highlands of Venezuela. The loss or reduction of amphibian species may have some important ecological consequences, for they are crucial to food chains. Thus, the energy linkage, as well the predator and/or the prey populations would be altered. This ecological biodiversity impoverishment would carry a loss of genetic material of potential use as well as a waste of food and/ or pharmacological resources. The only pattern found among most of the Venezuelan declining amphibian species is that a high number are found at elevation. Why this occurs is not totally understood but may be due to water contamination or 57 higher UV radiation levels at elevation, thus exhibiting vulner- ability of amphibian species to this region particularly (Blaustein et al. 1994). Many causes can be responsible for the amphibian and other vertebrate’s decline, but most can be framed into two kinds of environmental changes: human activities and astronomic factors (Table 9; Péfaur 1993). Many conservation problems are faced and intended to be solved at the international level and at the national level by different government offices. As a nation, Venezuela has par- ticipated in several international agreements to protect the environment and/or the fauna. Among the more important ones are the Biodiversity Convention and The Amazonic Co- operation Treaty, designed to protect large areas; and the Interamerican Agreement for Protection and Conservation of Sea Turtles, as well as the Freshwater Convention, which is concerned with quality and quantity of the resource, its ba- sins, the area drained by a river and its branches, and its fauna. Projects to protect crocodiles (Gorzula 1985; Thornbjarnarson 1991; Velasco and Ayarzagiiena 1995; Baquero de Pedret and Quero de Pefia 1996; and many tech- nical reports listed under Seijas 1993) or turtles (Licata et al. 1996) under the responsibility of the Venezuelan Ministry of the Environment (MARNR) should help ensure proper pro- tection and preservation of these animals. At several Venezu- elan university laboratories, there are projects studying the biological and ecological aspects of amphibian and reptile species providing grounds to protect these valuable resources. As a corollary, it is usually accepted wisdom that the better we know a fauna and its associated ecosystems, the better protection we can offer. A list of imperiled species (this study), the existence of protected areas, together with management and scientific projects designed to protect Venezuela’s amphibians and reptiles, and the increasing international concern for them, strengthen the hope of preserving its valuable herpetofauna populations, and other resources, for future generations. Conclusions The existence of elevated ranges, extensive forests, and a myriad of rivers and other aquatic habitats, makes Venezuela an environmen- tal mosaic where a diverse fauna of 252 amphibians species and 299 reptiles species live. Each of the eight current biogeographical zones has a relatively numerous herpetofauna—the most diverse are the Guayana and the Andes, with 310 and 142 species, respectively. Due to the large area covered by certain territories, such as the Llanos and Guayana, the obtained value for the country’s Species-Richness Index is relatively low. However, the regions situated in northern Venezuela appear high in the worldwide species-richness ranking. The similarity among the biogeographical regions ts rather low when comparing shared amphibian species, but it is higher when comparing reptiles. Selective biogeographical barriers work mainly in the mountainous regions and are less effective in the ecological continuous landscape of the rest of the country. The higher amphibian similarity is found among the Llanos-Amazonas regions, while for the reptiles is found among the Guayans- Amazonas regions. Endemism in amphibians develops more in elevate ds, such as in the Guayana, the Andes, and the Coas‘a! Range. There are less endemic reptiles than amphibians, due to their greater ability to disperse. The area with more endemic reptiles Plate 40 Plate 41 __ meat Plate 42 Plate 4300” ee Plate 44 Plate 45 eee an i feerG Plate captions: 39. Tupinambis teguixin. The largest lizard of the country, is common in the Llanos and in the Lake Maracaibo zone. Venezuela, Zulia. 40. Leptotyphlops affinis. This small ground dwelling snake, can be found in restricted parts of the Andean region. Venezuela, Mérida. 41. Helminthophis flavoterminatus. This curious little snake distributes in many environments of the northwestern states. Venezuela, Mérida. 42. Leptodeira annulata. This species is probably one of the most common snakes and the one with the largest distribution in northern South America. Venezuela, Tachira. 43. Oxybelis fulgidus. This colored snake inhabits the southern lowlands. Venezuela, Bolivar. 44. Phylodryas viridissimus. An attractive snake distributing in the southern states of the country. Venezuela, Bolivar. 45. Micrurus mipartitus. Venezuela, Guatopo. Photo courtesy of Laurie J. Vitt. 46. Bothrops venezuelensis. A large snake usually found in the forested environments of the northern mountains. Venezuela, Tachira. JAIME E. PEFAUR AND JUAN A. RIVERO is the Guayana region. In terms of conservation, it is known that the more com- mon environmental changes, destruction and fragmentation of habitats and agricultural expansion, will have severe consequences for the herpetofauna in Venezuela. As many species are endemics and restricted to small areas, the destruction of a few kilometers of the habitats could eliminate several species. The rapid de- struction and/or contamination of natural environments are caus- ing a decline in herpetofauna populations and numbers so as to put some species at extinction risk. Most imperiled amphibians are those living in the highlands of northern Venezuela, while the most endangered reptiles are the marine turtles, crocodilians, alligators, and turtles. It is hoped that the existence of several National Parks and other protected areas, and the increasing awareness of the citizens, would help to preserve the Venezu- elan herpetofauna. Acknowledgements.—We thank the people of the Animal Ecology group at the Universidad de Los Andes and of the Department of Biology at the Universidad de Puerto Rico, Mayagiiez, for their permanent support to continue with our herpetological studies in Venezuela. In particular we are in- debted to William E. Duellman, James R. Dixon, Pedro Durant, Nancy M. Sierra, Alberto Veloso, Jesus Manzanilla, Gustavo Casas-Andreu, César Molina, and the late Adao J. Cardoso for their help and continuous provision of data and references. Thanks are extended to the curators of the visited museums, especially to the Colecciédn de Vertebrados, Universidad de Los Andes, Mérida, Venezuela; Estacidn Biolodgica Rancho Grande del Ministerio del Ambiente y de los Recursos Natu- rales, Maracay, Venezuela; Museo de Historia Natural La Salle, Caracas, Venezuela; Museo de Biologia, Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad Central de Venezuela, Caracas, Venezuela; Museo de Zoologia Agricola, Universidad Central de Venezuela, Maracay, Venezuela; Museo de Biologia, Universidad de Puerto Rico, Mayagiiez, Puerto Rico; Instituto de Ciencias Naturales, Universidad Nacional, Bogota, Colombia; Instituto de Biologia, Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Sao Paulo, Brazil; Mu- seum of Natural History, The University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas, USA; Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago, Illinois, USA; Department of Wildlife and Fisheries Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, USA; Mu- seum of Vertebrate Zoology, The University of California, Berkeley, California, USA; Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard University, Cambridge, USA; and Museum National d’Histoire Naturelle, Paris, France. Comments and corrections made by Jack Sites, William W. Lamar, Craig Hassapakis, and two anonymous reviewers are deeply appreciated. Errors re- main ours. Belkis Rivas and Yhilda Paredes were helpful in the preparation of previous drafts. Marisela Angelino prepared the final version of the manuscript. This study has been granted by CDCHT-Universidad de Los Andes (C-805-96) and CONICIT (PI-011). References Avila-Pires, T. C. S. 1995. Lizards of Brazilian Amazonia (Rep- tilia: Squamata). Zoologische Verhandelingen (Leiden) 299:1-706. Ayarzagtiena, J. 1992. Los Centrolénidos de la Guayana Venezolana. Publicaciones Amigos de Donana (Sevilla) 1:48 p. Ayarzagiiena, J., Senaris, J. C., and Gorzula, S. 1992. El grupo 59 Osteocephalus rodriguezi de las tierras altas de la Guayana venezolana: descripcion de cinco nuevas especies. Memorias de la Sociedad de Ciencias Naturales (Caracas), Tomo LIT 137:113-142. Ayarzagiiena, J., Sefaris, J. C., and Gorzula, S. 1992. Un nuevo género para las especies del “Grupo Osteocephalus rodriguezi” (Anura: Hylidae). Memorias de la Sociedad de Ciencias Naturales (Caracas), Tomo LII 138:213-221. Baquero de Pedret, B. and Quero de Pefia, M. 1996. Manejo del programa de zoocriaderos de la especie Baba (Caiman crocodilus) en Venezuela. Zoocriaderos 1(1):01—06. Bisbal, F. J. 1988. Impacto humano sobre los habitat de Venezu- ela. Interciencia 13(5):226-232. Blaustein, A. R. and Wake, D. B. 1990. Declining amphibian populations: a global phenomenon? Trends in Ecology and Evolution 5(7):203-204. Blaustein, A. R., Hoffman, P. D., Hokit, D. G, Kiesecker, J. M., Walls, S. C., and Hays, J. B. 1994. UV repair and resistance to solar UV-B in amphibians eggs: a link to population declines? Proceedings of the National Academy of Sci- ences 91:1791-1795. Bodini, R. and Pérez-Hernandez, R. 1985. Proposicion de regiones biogeograficas para Venezuela en base a la distribucion de los Cebidos, p. 323-333 in A Primatologia no Brasil 2. Anais do 2° Congreso Brasileiro de Primatologia, Campinas. Brame, A. H. and Wake, D. B. 1963. The salamanders of South America. Contributions in Science, Natural History Mu- seum of Los Angeles County 69:1-72. Brown, K. S., Jr., Sheppard, P. M., and Turner, R. G. 1974. Quaternary refuges in tropical America: evidence from race formation in Heliconius butterflies. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London-fB) 187:369-378. Campbell, J. A. and Lamar, W. W. 1989. The Venomous Reptiles of Latin America. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, New York. 425 p. Casas-Andreu, G., Méndez-de la Cruz, F. R., and Camarillo, J. L. 1996. Anfibios y reptiles de Oaxaca: lista, distribuci6n y con- servacion. Acta Zoolégica Mexicana (nueva serie) 69:1-35. Di Bernardo, M. 1992. Revalidation of the genus Echinanthera Cope, 1894, and its conceptual amplification (Serpentes, Colubridae). Comunicaciones del Museo de Ciéncias PUCRS, Série Zoologia (Porto Alegre) 5(13):225-256. Diaz, A., Péfaur, J. E., and Durant, P. 1997. Ecology of South American Paéramos with emphasis on the fauna of the Ven- ezuelan Paramos, p. 263-310 in Wielgolaski, F. E. and Goodall, D. (editors). Ecosystems of the World, Volume 3, Polar and Alpine Tundra. Elsevier Science, Amsterdam. Dixon, J. R. 1980. The neotropical colubrid snake genus Liophis: the generic concept. Milwaukee Public Museum, Contri- butions in Biology and Geology 31:1-40. Dixon, J. R. 1989. A key and checklist to the neotropical snake genus Liophis with country lists and maps. Smithsonian Herpetological Information Service 79:1-28. Dixon, J. R. and Hendricks, F. S. 1979. The wormsnakes (family Typhlopidae) of the Neotropics, exclusive of the Antilles. Zoologische Verhandelingen (Leiden) 173:3-39. Dixon, J. R. and Michaud, E. J. 1992. Shaw’s black-backed snake (Liophis melanotus) (Serpentes: Colubridae) of northern South America. Journal of Herpetology 26(3):250-259. Duellman, W. E. 1979. The herpetofauna of the Andes: pat- terns of distribution, origin, differentiation and present communities, p. 371-459 in Duellman, W. E. (editor). 7/ South American Herpetofauna: its origin, evolution and dispersal. Museum of Natural History of the Universit Kansas Monographs 7. Duellman, W. E. 1982. Compresion climatica cuaternaria en los Andes, p. 184-201 in Efectos sobre la especiacion. Actas VIII Congreso Latinoamericano de Zoologia, Mérida. Duellman, W. E. 1985. Reproductive modes in anuran amphib- VENEZUELAN AMPHIBIANS AND REPTILES ians: phylogenetic significance of adaptive strategies. South African Journal of Science 81:174-178. Duellman, W. E. 1988. Patterns of species diversity in anuran amphibians in American tropics. Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden 75:79-104. Duellman, W. E. 1995. Temporal fluctuations and abundance of anuran amphibians in a seasonal Amazonian rainforest. Journal of Herpetology 29(1):13-21. Duellman, W. E. and Trueb, L. 1986. Biology of Amphibians. McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York. Duellman, W. E. and Wiens, J. J. 1992. The status of the Hylid frog genus Ololygon and the recognition of Scinax Wagler, 1830. Occasional Papers of the Museum of Natural His- tory of the University of Kansas 151:1-23. Durant, P. and Diaz, A. 1996. Herpetofauna de cinco cuencas andino venezolanas, p. 351-375 in Péfaur, J. E. (editor). Herpetologia Neotropical. Universidad de Los Andes, Consejo de Publicaciones, Mérida. Eisenberg, J. F. and Redford, K. 1979. A biogeographic analysis of the mammalian fauna of Venezuela, p. 31-36 in Eisenberg, J. F. (editor). Vertebrate Ecology in the North- ern Neotropics. National Zoological Park, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C. 271 p. Ewel, J. J. and Madriz, A. 1968. Zonas de vida de Venezuela: memoria explicativa sobre el mapa ecologico. MAC, Edi- torial Sucre, Caracas. 265 p. Frost, D. R. 1985. Amphibians Species of the World: a taxonomic and geographical reference. Association of Systematic Col- lections and Allen Press, Inc., Lawrence, Kansas. Frost, D. R. and Etheridge, R. 1989. A phylogenetic analysis and taxonomy of iguanian lizards (Reptilia: Squamata). Museum of Natural History of the University of Kansas Miscellaneous Publications 81:1-65. Gallardo, J. M. 1965. A propésito de los Leptodactylidae (Am- phibia, Anura). Papéis Avulsos de Zoologia (Sao Paulo) 17:77-87. Gallardo, J. M. 1965. The species Bufo granulosus Spix (Salientia: Bufonidae) and its geographic variation. Bulle- tin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology (Harvard) 134:107-138. Gallardo, J. M. 1969. La distribucién de las subespecies de Bufo granulosus Spix: su fidelidad a jos sistemas hidrograficos Sudamericanos. Ciencia e Investigacion (Buenos Aires) 25:406-416. Gorzula, S. 1985. The management of crocodilians in Venezuela, p. 91-101 in Webb, G., Manolis, C., and Whitehead, P. (edi- tors). Wildlife Management: crocodiles and alligators. Sur- rey Beatty and Sons P., Ltd., Chipping Norton, Australia. Hayek, L-A.C. 1994. Analysis of amphibians biodiversity data, p. 207-269 in Heyer, W. R., Donnelly, M. A., McDiarmid, R. W., Hayek, L-A. C., and Foster, M. S. (editors). Measur- ing and Monitoring Biological Diversity: standard meth- ods for amphibians. Smithsonian Institution Press, Wash- ington, D.C. Hoogmoed, M. S. 1979. The herpetofauna of the Guianan re- gion, p. 241-280 in Duellman, W. E. (editor). The South American Herpetofauna: its origin, evolution and dispersal. Museum of the Natural History of the University of Kansas Monographs 7. Hoogmoed, M. S. and Gorzula, S. F. 1979. Checklist of the savanna inhabiting frogs of the El Manteco region with notes on their ecology and the description of a new species of tree-frog (Hylidae, Anura). Zoologische Mededelinge 54:183-216. Huber, O. and Alarcon, C. ezuela. Oscar Todtmann Editores, Caracas. Johnson, J. D. 1989. A biogeographical analysis of the herpetofauna of Northwestern nuclear Central America. Milwaukee Public Museum Contributions in Biology and Geology 76:1-66. 1988. Mapa de Vegetacion de Ven- 60 La Marca, E. 1992. Catalogo taxonomico, biogeografico y bibliografico de las ranas de Venezuela. Cuadernos Geogrdaficos (Mérida) 9:1-197. La Marca, E. 1995. Biological and systematic synopsis of a genus of frogs from northern mountains of South America (Anura: Dendrobatidae: Mannophryne). Bulletin of the Maryland Herpetological Society 31(2):40-77. La Marca, E. and Reinthaler, H. P. 1991. Population changes in Atelopus species of the Cordillera de Mérida, Venezuela. Herpetological Review 22(4):125-128. Lancini, A. R. 1986. Serpientes de Venezuela. Ernesto Armitano Editor, Caracas. Lee, J. C. 1980. An ecogeographical analysis of the herpetofauna of the Yucatan Peninsula. Museum of Natural History of the University of Kansas Miscellaneous Publications 67:1-75. Licata, L., Galvez, S., Marin, E., Rebolledo, N., Useche, E., and Pérez, F. 1996. Bases para el manejo de la tortuga arrau (Podocnemis expansa) en el Orinoco medio, p. 379-417 in Péfaur, J. E. (editor). Herpetologia Neotropical. Universidad Los Andes, Consejo de Publicaciones, Mérida. Mago-Leccia, F. 1970. Lista de los peces de Venezuela: incluyendo un estudio preliminar sobre la ictiogeografia del pais. Ministerio de Agricultura y Cria, Oficina Nacional de Pesca, Caracas. 283 p. Manzanilla, J., Fernandez-Badillo, A., La Marca, E., and Visbal G. R. 1995. Fauna del Parque Nacional Henri Pittier, Ven- ezuela: composicion y distribucion de los anfibios. Acta Cientifica Venezolana 46:294-302. Manzanilla, J., Fernandez-Badillo, A., and Visbal G, R. 1996. Fauna del Parque Nacional Henri Pittier, Venezuela: composicion y distribucion de los reptiles. Acta Cientifica Venezolana 47:1—12. MARNR. 1992. Areas Naturales Protegidas de Venezuela: serie aspectos conceptuales y metodologicos. DGSPOA/ACM/ OI, Caracas. Marrero, L. 1964. Venezuela y Sus Recursos. Cultural Venezolana, Sociedad Anonima, Caracas. 700 p. Medem, F. 1981. Los Crocodylia de Sur América. Volume I. Los Crocodylia de Colombia. Coleccion de Ciencias, Ministerio de Educacién Nacional, Fondo Colombiano de Investigaciones Cientificas y Proyectos Especiales “F. J. de Caldas,” Bogota. Medem, F. 1983. Los Crocodylia de Sur América. Volume II. Venezuela, Trinidad, Tobago, Guyana, Suriname, Guayana Francesa, Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia, Brasil, Paraguay, Argen- tina, Uruguay. Coleccion de Ciencias, Ministerio de Educacion Nacional, Fondo Colombiano de Investigaciones Cientificas y Proyectos Especiales “F. J. de Caldas,” Bogota. Myers, C. W. 1987. New generic names for some neotropical poison frogs (Dendrobatidae). Papéis Avulsos de Zoologia (Sdo Paulo) 36(25):301-306. Myers, C. W., Paolillo, A., and Daly, J. W. 1991. Discovery of a defensively malodorous and nocturnal frog in the family Dendrobatidae: phylogenetic significance of a new genus and species from the Venezuelan Andes. Novitates, Ameri- can Museum of Natural History (New York) 3002. 33 p. Nussbaum, R. A. and Wilkinson, M. 1989. On the classification and phylogeny of Caecilians (Amphibia: Gymnophiona), a critical review. Herpetological Monographs 3:1-42. Ojasti, J. 1967. Consideraciones sobre la ecologia y conservacion de la tortuga Podocnemis expansa (Chelonia, Pelo- medusinae). Atas do Simposio sobre a Biota Amazonica 7:201-206. Péfaur, J. E. 1985. New species of Venezuelan Colostethus (Dendrobatidae). Journal of Herpetology 19(3):321-327. Péfaur, J. E. 1992. List and bibliography (1960-85) of the Ven- ezuelan herpetofauna. Smithsonian Herpetological Infor- mation Service 89:1-54. Péfaur, J. E. 1993. Description of a new Colostethus (Dendrobatidae) with some natural history comments on JAIME E. PEFAUR AND JUAN A. RIVERO the genus in Venezuela. Alyfes 11(3):88-96. Péfaur, J. E., and Diaz de Pascual, A. 1982. Aspectos biogeograficos de las comunidades de anfibios y saurios de los Andes venezolanos, p. 229-262 in Salinas, P. (editor). Zoologia Neotropical. Actas VIII Congreso Latino- americano de Zoologia, Mérida. Péfaur, J. E. and Diaz de Pascual, A. 1987. Distribucion ecologica y variacion temporal de los anfibios del Estado Barinas, Ven- ezuela. Revista de Ecologia Latinoamericana 1 (3-4):9-19. Péfaur, J. E. and Pérez, R. 1995. Zoogeografia y variacion espacial y temporal de algunos vertebrados epigeos de la zona xerofila de la cuenca media del rio Chama, Merida, Venezuela. Ecotropicos 8(1):15-35. Péfaur, J. E. and Sierra, N. M. 1995. Status of Leptodactylus labyrinthicus (Calf Frog, Rana ternero) in Venezuela. Her- petological Review 26(3):124-127. Péfaur, J. E. and Rivero, J. A. 1989. Biogeografia de la herpetofauna venezolana. Resumenes I Congreso Latino- americano de Ecologia 7 p. Péfaur, J. E., Pérez, R., Sierra, N., and Godoy, F. 1987. Density reappraisal of caecilians in the Andes of Venezuela. Jour- nal of Herpetology 21(4):414-419. Praderio, M. J. 1985. Aspectos ecologicos de una poblacion de Colostethus herminae (Dendrobatidae) en la quebrada de Guariquita, Estado Miranda. Tesis Especial de Grado, Universidad Simon Bolivar, Caracas. Presch, W. 1980. Evolutionary history of the South American Microteiid lizards (Teiidae: Gymnophthalminae). Copeia 1980(1):36-56. l Pritchard, P. C. H. and Trebbau, P. 1984. The Turtles of Venezu- ela. Society for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles, Cushing-Malloy, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan. Ramo, C. 1982. Biologia del galapago (Podocnemis vogli) (Muller, 1935) en el Hato El Frio. Llano de Apure (Venezu- ela). Donana Acta Vertebrata (Sevilla) 9(3):1-157. Rivero, J. A. 1961. Salientia of Venezuela. Bulletin of the Mu- seum of Comparative Zoology (Harvard) 126:1-207. Rivero, J. A. 1963a. The distribution of Venezuelan frogs. I. The Maracaibo basin. Caribbean Journal of Science 3:7-13. Rivero, J. A. 1963b. The distribution of Venezuelan frogs. II. The Venezuelan Andes. Caribbean Journal of Science 3:87-102. Rivero, J. A. 1963c. The distribution of Venezuelan frogs. III. The Sierra de Perija and the Falcon region. Caribbean Journal of Science 3: 197-199. Rivero, J. A. 1964a. The distribution of Venezuelan frogs. IV. The Coastal Range. Caribbean Journal of Science 4:307-319. Rivero, J. A. 1964b. The distribution of Venezuelan frogs. V. The Venezuelan Guayana. Caribbean Journal of Science 4:411-420. Rivero, J. A. 1964c. The distribution of Venezuelan frogs. VI. The Llanos and Delta region. Caribbean Journal of Sci- ence 4:491-495. Rivero, J. A. 1979. Sobre el origen de la fauna paramera de anfibios venezolanos, p. 165-175 in Salgado-Laboriau, M. L. (editor). El medio ambiente paramo. IDEA, Caracas. Rivero, J. A. 1982a. Los Eleutherodactylus (Amphibia, Leptodactylidae) de los Andes Venezolanos. I. Especies del paramo. Memorias de la Sociedad de Ciencias Naturales La Salle (Caracas) 42(118):9-16. Rivero, J. A. 1982b. Los Eleutherodactylus (Amphibia, Leptodactylidae) de los Andes Venezolanos. II. Especies subparameras. Memorias de la Sociedad de Ciencias Natu- rales La Salle (Caracas) 42(118):57-132. Rivero, J. A. 1985. Nuevos centrolénidos de Colombia y Ven- ezuela. Brenesia 23:335-373. Rivero, J. A. and Solano, H. 1977. Origen y evolucién de los Eleutherodactylus (Amphibia: Leptodactylidae) de los Andes venezolanos. Memorias de la Sociedad de Ciencias Naturales La Salle (Caracas) 37:265-282. Rivero-Blanco, C. and Dixon, J. R. 1979. Origin and distribu- 61 tion of the herpetofauna of the dry lowlands regions of northern South America, p. 281-298 in Duellman, W. E. (editor). The South American Herpetofauna: its origin, evolution and dispersal. Museum of Natural History of the University of Kansas Monographs 7. Rodriguez, J. P. and Rojas-Suarez, F. 1995. Libro rojo de la fauna venezolana. PROVITA, Fundacion Polar, Caracas. Roze, J. 1966. Taxonomia y zoogeografia de los ofidios de Venezuela. Editorial Biblioteca, Universidad Central Ven- ezuela, Caracas. 362 p. Ruiz-Carranza, P. M. and Lynch, J. D. 1991. Ranas Centrolenidae de Colombia I. Propuesta de una nueva clasificacion genérica. Lozania (Bogota) 57:30 p. Savage, J. M. and Guyer, C. 1989. Infrageneric classification and species composition of the anole genera, Anolis, Ctenotus, Dactyloa, Norops and Semiurus (Sauria: Iguanidae). Amphibia-Reptilia 10:105-116. Schubert, C. and Huber, O. 1989. La Gran Sabana, Panoramica de una region, Cuadernos Lagoven. Lagoven S. A., Caracas. 108 p. Schubert, C. and Vivas, L. (editors). 1993. El Cuaternario de la Cordillera de Mérida, Andes Venezolanos. Universidad de Los Andes/Fundacion Polar, Mérida. Seijas, A. E. 1993. Listado bibliografico comentado sobre los crocodylia de Venezuela. Biblioapuntes, documento técnico de Biodoc (Guanare) 1:10 p. Seijas, A. E. 1996. La conservacion y manejo de Crocodilidos en la region neotropical, p. 419-427 in Péfaur, J. E. (edi- tor). Herpetologia Neotropical. Universidad de Los Andes, Consejo de Publicaciones, Mérida. Senaris, J. C., Ayarzagiiena, J., and Gorzula, S. 1994. Los sapos de la familia Bufonidae (Amphibia: Anura) de las tierras altas de la Guayana venezolana: descripci6n de un nuevo género y tres especies. Publicaciones de la Asociacion de Amigos de Donana (Sevilla) 3:1-37. Silva, J. L., Valdez, J., and Ojasti, J. 1985. Algunos aspectos de una comunidad de ofidios del Norte de Venezuela. Biotropica 17(2):112-125. Staton, M. A. and Dixon, J. R. 1977. The herpetofauna of the central Llanos: noteworthy records, a tentative checklist and ecological notes. Journal of Herpetology 11(1):17—24. Thorbjarnarson, J. 1991. An analysis of the spectacled caiman (Caiman crocodilus) harvest program in Venezuela, p. 217- 235 in Robinson, J. and Redford, K. (editors). Neotropical Wildlife Use and Conservation. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Illinois. Vanzolini, P. E. 1978. On South American Hemidactylus (Sauria, Gekkonidae). Papéis Avulos de Zoologia (Sao Paulo) 31(20):307-343. Velasco, A. and Ayarzagiiena, J. 1995. Situacion actual de las poblaciones de baba (Caiman crocodilus) sometidas a aprovechamiento comercial en los Llanos venezolanos. Publicaciones de la Asociacién de Amigos de Dohana (Sevilla) 5. 71 p. Vial, J. L. and Saylor, L. 1993. The status of amphibian popula- tions: a compilation and analysis. A report of the Declining Amphibian Populations Task Force (DAPTF) to the SSC/ IUCN Working Document 1. 98 p. Wilkinson, M. 1996. Resolution of the taxonomic status of Nectocaecilia haydee (Roze) and a revised key to the gen- era of the Typhlonectidae (Amphibia: Gymnophiona). Jour- nal of Herpetology 30(3):413-415. Yustiz, E. 1996. Aspectos biogeograficos de la herpetofauna de la cuenca hidrografica del Rio Turbio (Estado Lara-Ven- ezuela), p. 317-349 in Péfaur, J. E. (editor). Herpetologia Neotropical. Universidad de Los Andes, Consejo ¢ Publicaciones, Mérida. Manuscript received: 26-April-1997 Accepted: 15-January-1998 ~-Quoz [eorydesZoa301g sanoodsas oy uIyIIM satsods sejnoned 4c a[POOM puke UIOD DUuLIDUDY L961 OJATY TUYD! E66] Slleuas pue euensezieAy isanbindul 298] Jaduelnog psounss P28 xIds voydy.ssoa PZ8T Palm Supnidass 8P8T [eYISOLL, VIDADIIDI (QGL] Snaeuuly) supoqg [96] OLOALY 1anuaq LOGI OLOATY Mqssanq EGG] SeUaS pue PUaNsdeZIeAY DIUDWUOAID POGI OIIATY tuviuajy PZ8I XIds vipjoundoq)y sf Es) fad fam) food md em fem fem sm) c=) sm) se PZRI XIdS pipuiBapwuo0g)y Yj}KH ZZ61 aoley MMOSUDITIM 75) O86] UeW]jaNG Mayon 75} (PGS pue[ULaAA) Dtafiao 79) EEG] aley mojfoou 75) PPGL UUNG apuajay poayIO.ISDH (E681 Jedneog) snapwsdd 7 PEGI Jaye mpysaszyy snjouojoa)y (QG6] SUdNoP) SNuDjOZaUaA UOpoUaydspindy AVCTTAH (SQ6I Inejag) snup.sas (9/6[ OIA) DUIOISO10 (G86 Borel PY) Napurjow (Z161 JUeING pue ojOG) Sisuapiaut (Q16] OBA) IDS40AnU (916 OJAARY]) avaapcvy (SQ6I Inejag) Nupanp (S061 Josua]nog) snpynsoqp sapqojaydan (LLG OIALY) IY4DULLaAaIS SaIDGOAUI| (6861 BORA eT) usnk W (A8QT UeWe) sua WN (G96 SOURG-OSOUDG) 10.1aA14 W (P86 OLAATY) DIDsANN]GO W W W W W 2/2/2) 2) 2/2 (2 (9S6] ISa]) DUIqou (1661 ZHSNA) PuipuDd.«y} (E681 Jasye0g) anunusay PEGI Poe eT Puniiajjipioo (Z16| Josua|nog) sHD]]Oo aucydouuD py 0 souasaid syuasoidas Suipeys,. w| (L881 9doD) snouuniqg (9G6I 1SA],) PJOXawmosg snyiaisojoy 1661 Aled pue ‘ojjjoeg ‘siaAJ SNUMIIOU SajDqowo1y HaVCILVaOXYGNAG (L961 UIOD) 140]K0) (G6 OJBATY) wnIDI0A04 (GQ6 OLBATY) WNInaUIjO1Na] (S861 OOATY) wnpiy]DC (S861 OLIATQY) Sapiowsapoon.yso (Q9G6T OLOATY) S1]DIUalI0 (2661 PUaNGeZJeAY) Sisuatpidsy! at (266] PuansezieAY) anuajay (S861 OFOATY) SI304f (S681 Josyeog) munuyosialf (S861 OJAI) NUuDunp H i (E9GI UlOD) isauayisiyUD 1 (Z66] PuensezieAY) DuDappinp (E66 PuansezieAy pue siueuas) pupindajupann v]Jaun.AYIOD tm (GQ6] OJOALY) Wnsoursijud) 2) (2661 PuansezieAY) 1jnz108 Za (Z88T Jesuanog) iMapyong ; (Q96] O19ATY) wnuipun a) (8961 OJIATY) SI]DUIpNIN]D auajosjuaDy HVCINHTOULNAD PEGI e[NzZIO45 pue ‘euanBezsecy ‘sieuas Manbspa (C681 Jasuajnog) myojanb SS Se Sy Te na Si ay > PEGI P[NZ1IOS pue “eUINSeZIeAY ‘SLIePUIS pAasiu 006] Jesus;nog 1jauUuosIMIU J 96] e[NzZIOy pue Aesueiy-Osaiq Maqny S66] SWBUaS DIIdAID DjJaUudsydoasi—d, PEGI e[NZ1OS pue ‘euensezieAy ‘sileuas IMsos snosuAiydyjaw (QG/[ snaeuuly) sniuoyda = -g SQ] JayIUNH SHipUsisoUutaisS ~ S06[ Joua\\ snoispu (QGL] SNeeuUTy) sna (p28t xIds) smipniara "a (QE6I Ipnyos]) snioid sajpqopadidy OG6BI e[Nz104) snynfns ‘qd POST JAUYOePUTa}S SY}aIUONa] SaIMqoapua (L961 OOATY) ladasys : 9861 WOISLg pue ‘QUOSUP'T “OJOATY TUMADULUDS 8L61 OAL Sisuanyps 966] safelWeg PUR IpIeYUI|Y av.1ay.tod (ZE6I IPlUYyIS) UMlojapuduU 916] OLAATY SYDpsvdoa] SLE] OJAARY Sipuny (T96] OJAATY) tuunp €66I INejad sisuaulindys SIS} IS SIS SS ISIS) PZ8T XIdS snsojnunss Z88I Jasuatnog sdtydojv.aa ofn O66I OJIOUDy pUP “RIDIRS) “ROIRI| BT aSuapuip)} B qd a qd 66L1 Japreuyas snivyins gd d gd v SQGI Bde] BT loupisos ‘Vv OSGI OJBATY 1losupuid “Y COGBT Jaeduaynog snyoudysKxo Vv P16 OJOATY Sisuaifoqnonut “Vv (968 Sua}Ie|AY pu UTe}sua}YOI]) 4ad1on41T aT | 966 BIR PT Snjpv4soo0sAsyo "Y ct | ZI6I O1OAIY SisUaiauogipo sndojaiy AVGINOANG VaONV VISIHd NV P At] my] uy 1 sauoz jeotydessoado1g Vv xX Vv cle S3Alliday GNV SNVIEIHdINNVY NVWIANZANSA AO LSITHOSHO :b XIGNAddV 62 288] Jodua[nog si.so411sU0] 9661 JoAe}] Saiapuoyny (SP6I UOSSIopUY) Sap10)Mjoppojda} (p28 xids) snomjuicqn] (L181 edo5) supiqr} ZL6I JOAVH Maspnuy QO6I INoqieg wnsvjnsur (66Z1 Jeplouyps) snosnf p661 Joka} Snapaip LLG paowsooy pue yUAT snpAjojonaz 9661 Al[ouuog pure sIaAJy sisuarana (161 UNI) 1847]14 P86 Poe BT] asippuva (P681 Jasna0g) 1yoln LOGI OJOATY Sisuaambuuniny ZR6 OIOALY SNSPULAGnI 196] OJOATY Siparjogan.1a} SG6I ISA], pue Jay[eAA SNISIpoUals LOGI OJOATY 10204 E66] PUL eT pue YOUAT 1010A14 GG6I ISA], pue Jay[eAA SmIvjnoyaA 896] OLOATY SHIDUIApNG Z861 OLBATY 10pIN [[9UUOG puke SJOAJ] SNIDUINAC Z86I OLOATY SHIDLUSOInaIC ZRGI OJOATY SNAaWUiD.ADG OLGI UIOD pue uRIYDOD Mofaoiu Z8GI OLBATY Mfpopuou ZQ6I OLBATY Snioosdounjout (E68 Jadya0q) issnpu (0061 Josuanog) snipsowapu Z861 OJDATY Snsouisiua] 896] SOLeG-OSOUOG MuIDun) PIG] Inoqieg 1auojsuyo! (P96I OIATY) oud (TL81 epedsy ej op zouauIIf) sninusoo Z86] YuUS pue eorepy BT SoYyoNsojoo Z8GI OJOATY DUIOSOLO]YO ]Jouuog pure sad] supnuD. (C06) Joduajnog) tuaoug €16] PdJOARI\] PUL OJOALY SisUaOU00G (€98] SJojad) snjnumoig €R6I PuandezseAY 10];aUU0]09 (8961 OJOATY) Sisuapinp sn]Aioppopiyo9sig (SLI shaeuuly) vInULOD : 0681 Josua[Nog vIDAvI]D9 sdtydojD.1ay (8981 8doD) vidioppanjdy (€Z6] JaT[NJA) aadpun viauouapy P86 aNdse7] pue psowusooy YSo.injind aucaydojapy AVAITALOVGOLdaT 926] odley tuaayins aucsydo]ly AVGINAYNHdOTIV 2661 P[NZIO*) pue *SIIRUIS ‘puons It j UMADUALA ‘L 2661 PINZ joa] L e661 iDjDd oi BezieAV apo 7 —— P86 peousooy] pue ueU|jang avi ¢ (T96T OLOAIQ) sisuanbonyninw a 9961 O10! 8 re 9961 9 =| (POI J [NOq) isupaa viunfaig (TOS Ulpned) snajov] snyoucysouanyds | (pest xidg) snpudis-x ——°g (6L6T BINZIOH pue paowudoo}) snypauryiy rr (S9L[ Quemney) 4aqna S (EQRI Slajag) snIpAjso.u o (PZ8T XIds) snsojngau S (E261 wingAg) Mpauuay 9 (9261 Ollaqiy-epueIA) laquvs 5 (986] UeW][eNnC) snsixe 6 (QQ6] UeWI{[aNG) eDUDp § (L88] 9d0D) Masuajnog (996] Ul0D) tupiuasaog (L9G OLOATY) Leaupinsuinng xpuidg 926] SU2MaJY SUDIUL (g9g] adod) pusaidowo} (Q98T edoD) snis.int Z96] Josnoyyuny iulpoawu (COST UlpNed) sypupuosodKy (ZLLT Moeppog) -0]091g psnpawo))} My (QOL NuaIne]) Dsojnuad spayoudsyd Z9Q] JouyoepUla}S snuLinDd] ALAA ayayaya (TEQ] UOIqrg pue [euind) Minaiuday 7) (ZQ8] Jaduanog) iMapyonq ‘O IWRUAS PUR [IS] P[NZIOH Ipuansy2zpAv snjpydad0ajsC OG] Joysed WuApM * Z66] poowsooy puek UeLU][aNg Ma.ioM 9661 TLG6] OUR[OS sunjid1A ZLGL OLOATY #289)q18 266] poowsooy pur ueWT[aNng vUADLO4 (662 [ Jopreuyos) Dipjoun LGQ] Iplwiyys xpusnc G06] Jadustnog vjAppAynj]c G86] UeWYJand PUpIjac QS8T doyjUNy vivlosyfijnu ZL Siolog VInunU [L6G] OLOATY PyNosnunu 988T ado0yg vjPYdado.91U (LOG OJAATY) StSuapiLioaw (QOLT Wueiney) Div1oulmu LZ6| XNOY YID]]A90aIN} TOG] OAT Laspiiaao] ZLG[ OIOALY WOW] 696] OJOATY PIMOS] (OZ8] adoD) stuuofioun) SS) ES et eel el el el el ele el el el eS ee ee AVCINAVESIHdNYV (2881 Jaduanog) ussajad pipoavI0}9aN VINA VaASIHd NV AVAILOANO THdAL (O81 Jepleuyos) snipu0siy ‘d (2p6] uunq) sasiu sdouoi9idg (LOQT J8IAND) snsoagadjnd snyonsoajyg AVCILVINAYLVNIH& QSGLT snoeuury sasiu upWIDD (OZ8T URYIA)) SHIDjnuun sdouoydig QSL SneeUuUrT snjipooosd uDWADD = (E961 OURJOS puke aZOY]) 1aqD4 DIIAvIOANI AVAMOLVOITIV -—| |} QSL] snoeuur] DIDjnoniual 5 | |l ZyGT UU sMPOLTTG BIBI SAARI) SNIPautsajun 9) ee es Z081 MeyS SIloDAs Za Cog) ee POD] | PP gt J} Se aAVdlTAGOOO0ND AVCIVITOYVO VITAGOOOND VNOIHdONWAD (6Z81 Zloyosyosy) paonarjo skjayoopidaT ZOGBI YEA puke alUBIG Saisa10 g (QQLT SnaeuUTT) DIDIAquE sAjayooUNaLT EES = Bara ZP6I Opidely, piningiog vsso]sonjog AVCILLNOGOHL4 Td (QGLI SNeeUUTT) DYA1D9 DYaADD (QGLI SnaeUUTT) sppau DiuojayD AVCIINOTHHSD VLIVGNVS (Q9L1 SheeUUTT) Dadvi.09 sAjay20ulag | [ey | U6t|lUR (9g/] SneeuUry) Dxoppsnd sipnasg AVCIA THHOOWSAC AvVdidnsd (992] SnaeuUly) sapioid4soos uousajsoury | [Tor Tey fy] P28I Xids sadnujod puny AVCINYALSONIMA AVGINVa (SLT SHOE PHMOTTAp 7 ee Steen Rena (pzgt xids) pitwu0g.sps (SaplouojayD) auojayo0ay pee oS Co €Z61 ese pue UsAYINY Paipd = -g ey ae PZ61 JIN Viedsy-g 916] UYOsyoez] yOQn.4y vdig AV IdId 006] Josuaynog visngo.s aucrydoiQ (ZOQ] Ulpned) sisuaiupiuiins “q (626 Joplouyos) sypAo siajoojs1yov}q POBL psrenbs0jy audsydouayy O86] [a}lomZ Snwouojxy Saispjapy 14098 (QI6[ UeAyINY) YppIsnd 686] YOUAT v.1aUn]] 126] Jaysieg Duniaog pjooipnyodopnasg (g981 ado) sdodyonig nwapo.sna) (F961 adoD) snsojnisnd d (9681 Josuatnog) Mayosy SOB aJOMIPOP] PUR ‘OULJOS ‘aJOMJea}{ aVJasaua snuav|DSAY (G6L Jepleuyos) snipaul) saixpoyn (Z98T SJa}ag) Mausna 7 P66 JoAdp Sisuaungns 7 SZ6I A[GON snsosna 7 E861 UINGAY pue JaAd}y 10.1aA1. 7 Al 7 T T (ZIQI Jaddlamyos) snuvowffoas (sdoussyd) sdoudsyd MY IS) SHUDIPLAAUAP SN}DYC CEB JOIN 11804 SPR [eyosoly, siyrun ZGQ1 [Weunq PupAma) : Te | fe ees (2181 JossloMups) psupdxa “ad oa (PZ8T XIdS) pppydasoayidsa sruaud0po0dg ime aS _ qVGISNGaNO Tad = SANIGNISAL | VITILda a ee oo co CS ES a ERR] laduajnog xpisAwopoy (z98] adod) snpiyoopioa0d (POST JauUYoepUTaIS) 1s81ajac (89, uainey) snjpdjoppojuad OS6I ZINT SLuso.apyyjod (PZ8I XidS) snaonsau | nz PIG] WUeWIYNA asuajanzauaa a rt | | [| [a (6L8] Joystiq) supipu 7 Sea (IPST uoIqrg pue [NaUING) PpNDrissasduios sajoouojYyda j Pal (6S81 ployed) udnpy snjydjowojog Sie 9Z6[ OsTOqhyYy-BpueIYAy WnutaysO4vLU 3 | 64 | 8S6I [[eZZ Suadqyov snsodojo01g — LL a | (8961 fulouey) Ippandwp snjxtoppouorid | ae Ee a] oa (E98I SI (TE61 ng pue yng) tain) 'N ea ea | 0061 Jasuajnog sipns 'N = — oa —_ SOG] eZOy IS1UaIDA : | — ; (QGL] SneeuUry) snIpULIDI1g snANdSNaN | (6981 Seied) = | a= (6821 elayeuuog) janhou. a (2081 ulpneq) vinjound — gq | (PLGT SWEIT]IM) DIpjoUndo.siu a (€Z6] JO[[NIN) tunipuiiwd10d puosodaT QGG] JUeID 1ipoomiapun D (€06] Jadue|nog) < (6681 od0D) vipuasf Do] Gong 2 L6G] swely dun) ec] snip.np N joauup sdoson (T98] [[eMo][eH) snsoiads Z5) V pur ‘909 ‘paowsooy snidCio snujoyiydouuky 996] lulouey] wniosdjayd Jeuuod pure siaAjj 1J2]2083 “| (Z981 Slolad) Suiso.ainoy snjspuodsng (8¢2] ShaeuUury) DUDS! DUDS] Z661 Puendezie 9661 Al 0&8 HVCINVNO! (ZO8T ulpned) DjAioppouow 98] Ula}sua}yoIT] pdosajay Sl (QGL[ SNeeuul]) Snostisng snosipisvg AVGINVHdOLAYOS 116| UOXIC] puke psoWDdOO]] sisuauDINs (6811 eusieuce) SueOSB UL (28L1 UANNOP) supnosidps snjGovpwoay] pOGT epnel ep = area a iS ESSA BO Ta RUSS (1e6! une Bue un mai aa tana Sapojpuosopnas, Z661 SIOAPY pure ‘plUUeIqoy ‘Ajjouuog sidajoidputs : OSA: Tae a Sd 196] lulouey] pue OoURTG-OJBALY MoOXIp snjAjovpo]|AY PEG] Woydey pue YyoIzoyeyy sisu 6961 IN] SnyIYyo) dC O66 Zolag-eloiesy pue eoleyy eT Wapqoy L196] SO1G-OSOUOC] 1849}a¢ RID) sNID}]290 (GGQT JOUsYIIND) s1Pcaumy LPG VADYS Stsuauogpp{ (1881 Assauysneys Q) snipuunu0s 996| SOlueg-Osouod an}19a9 P9GT OOUR|A-OJOATY HUIpog (2881 epnef ap pry uPA) sisuazjuuD 188] Josuainog sipjnuun (G2gt xids) snpidsiy QS6I 9ZOY U.laso0g SNIIUOZNUD SN]AJIDPOI]OD (8161 Uossopuy) 966] PHO]IA pue ‘SWeIT[IAA ‘sOueg Mupjaj Pre! uUNG Mofaou E66] PLUUeICoy pue ‘swWeIT]TIM ‘SIaATY Snuauijqaou 966] PHOTIA pue ‘SUL [IAA ‘SOM MbdlM4ajpysna 966] Ollepelg Ippoiso}avo 9661 Ajjeuuog pue sIaAWI Snjnouadyjaq snanpsogvuar (LG81 [JoMol[eH) 4aispsopido.4 (LE8T UOIGIG puke [IJauINd) 1a4dps G18] Assouysneys CQ vou0 (OE8I Ja[seMA) suanu (p981 adoD) sdaniqqis (LEQT UOIgIG pue [suNd) snppinvoosn, (VLG1 SWeITTIM) apap (PERT UUeUIdaT\A) sNIDIL0d1q : 18] ( 88L1 apadaceq) vAnoqvut €/6[ UOWO}, NY210419 ‘W (GZ8T XIdS) DivLusig DAngoW 65 (@SLI SneeuUTy) apuisa4 . : GZ8T Palm) sn44B0}19900 1961 9Z0y Sisuapinp (2081 MeYs) sniouvjau : (8SLI sneeuury) snipauy Z98TI adod snjpydauida (8GL1 ShoeeuUuly) snjjaqoo 098T 9G0D Sdaridadq SIydor] (6S8T JoyUND) BIINIaDYD s1ydojdoT (681 NoOotUUay}) s1pUOLuaidas a (QE61T WaAyINY) 14340q (G8ZI SheeuUTy) DIDjnuUD DsrapojdaT a (Teal Slaleg) Shusonqyp s (0981 edoD) wnynsuniy syjadosduny] : (P68 dod) snaafiua) (8S) SneeuUT]) vOYIUa. sapojuDUT (FZ81 Jase) sunpnsunisy sdospay (POS UURLILA}]) snjouiz1g sajspudpo.pA SORT uel SiUD]DOS ; = : PEGI PABIYS ap2zvispd : = (PSST Uolqig pue [LewNd) MWopnos LEBT [9da[yOS snuipavdoa} } Sooescs (L981 uef) snipipnuip P96] tulouRT] 1ad0Y4 696] PPueIIA-SeloJQ snoiuozpUD OIG XNoy munusyy ; : (QGLI Sneeuury) snipjnsun sdooyay 6S6I 8ZOY snjjos4oI0pnasd (8SL1 SneeuUly) sniDjnoas 6S6I Joqne;y snjjauar ( E981 Uf vU0ZIq : = (SLI sneeuUly) udvjnosan snadunpoayiKQaq LL 8S6I 9Z0Y ajyidos snipuy AVCITINV (098T JoUNd) Aafiquoyt smqowdKiq : ss SO ra QC/] SNAeUUTY] snutnw sajoaung (L281 910g) ON CL ee : oe (QGL1 Snaeuur) DuYyouUas sainindy uoIgig ‘[ewind) vIpsaLivA d : So (QGL[ SnaeuulT) snunjnjsoy (€S6I upwtely) sisuauphiuad (@GL] SheeuUI]) smumuDo snjyD LEST [999[YOS DUIUOAD QSL] Snaeuury - (GOI Josus{nog) syojuosfny] (2281 JoyjuNd) 1adoo 7 (PSST [Lewinq pue OD OJNAISUOD DOG davdiod SHLNadaaS (POST SJajag) s1pyonu q - 3 (ZERIT [eBaIyDS) si1ydoapuop uorprydoipuoq . SS (QSLT Snaeuury) wixindal siquinuidn (€O8T UIpNed) 1219 PYAID (FZ8T JopSeMA) Snpninos G CPE JOYE PUR IPIWIYIS siquaanjnw ZS6I 8ZOY Vjooiju dU (8GLI snaeuUrT) snosn{ (8GLZ] SnaeuUlq) snjajoxa (SZ snaeuurT) €66] Jonessaq pue v[O7+) snidAso snaoydopluauy - : | : Z98I 8do0D vp UO«Jiq Vv ROGT aZOy NuDULIaRaIS = — ; ee Se (QSLI SNOeUUIT) DalawD DalIawy T96I OZOY tosaart : 2 AVCISL 696] UloueT] avast : [ee CBGBI SAIIG-ETIAY Sisuaumuaxito : P68I Joousinog 4ofpiu : (SST [Mewind) snipiosvfiq snouidsonasy LOGT 9204 MUloUD] : — (0061 JaBuaTNOg) snisNsoona] MuDnjory SHIDISUU] (Z98T Uef) wnIDAIUNn T96T 9204 snp! su (2161 Josuatnog) sipwosfiaarg my (Shs 1l2MmorteH) Susouigiit L261 XNOY Majsny snsso|soyoug £061 Jaduainog SELON (Z98I Slalag) snsonion) a BGUOdS-Zo]eZUO) 101p GGBI ZUSNA pue Zalag-e1NIes) snjnaurjojpydao 7 SS! 66 Jo spue andy ejaenZaus/ Ss UOWILUOD alujunod Bulpunowns seyjo pue ejanzeua/ S| alIlpodo19 able) siy| “Snjjpooo/D UeWIeD Sam. : ua ie 9/61 BI[NUOJ\-Joupues anpdaua E661 OOH 1/2.1q 1.96] 9ZOY sniowa.s (Sg [Mewnq pue ‘uOIgs: (GT sheeuury (pSg] UOIgig pue [auING) sipUuloo si. (LEST [ada]yoS) s1mjj09 snansonmojdaT qVdIdV Ta (EORT UIpned) snajuadiv syjaqkxouay (8SLI sneeuury) snsadas YX (PZ8T Pol) snppydaso0pqn. uopouax (GSR Sidjog) DIpaUIUNU YIBYIOA CORT AZOY Isuaiiawu YsvALiquy (COST Ulpned) snssatduiod sosanundiy. [jouuod pue sIaApy 1AdK (L821 dsoquny) si181us (BGL1 ShoeuUTT) sup G66] PUaNBezIeAY puke eINZIO5 sisuanbonyvanu 9661 Aljouuod puke SIOAWY Dpinp GGG] PUANSeZIeAY PUR LINZIOD SIsua01090109 (pSQT [Mowing pue ‘uoIqrg ‘|IewWNd) VIoutoNUas (GL SNeeUUIT) PJMYydoooUnjaut DIPNUY TL. (EORT Slojad) SLUsoudasg snypydoan |, (9P81 Ploy) Mp«pyuasap puly.souals (G1 ] snaeuur) snipjjnd sajojidg (QGLT Sneeuuly) PIpjnqau uogis (GQL[ tOdooS) snsoursiua) : 926] UOsiapuy 1jPAaog UNdAYOGoUIYY (pZ8] Jo[deMA) Snaanydjns (vZ6T [esewy pue inoqieg) 1a1ysdosys (QS8T JayIUND) sNlouojioa0d saisnasq (QGL[ snaeuUly) s1upord xkKaopnasg (pGQ] [own pue ‘uOsqig ‘[ewind) Ipaimnau L081 Joplouyys vIDU0.L09 vOgGoOpNasd (SPST Ysinquioyys UT Jaysol]) Sisuaunins siydounygd T66] SJOAPY pue AT[oUUOG PIPpP409 sPAApo]yd LPG] VABIYS SHuYjanZzauada PS8I [Wownq pue ‘uoiqig ‘[MewiNnd snuiuadiy (QGZ] Sheeuuly) Yjola (COST UTphed) snpisyn (GPT [JoMo][eH) VIM. piuIN (PSQT [Meunq pure ‘uoiqrg ‘[eunqd) 12a/d 5 (Q6L[ UazZjUNS) H4apppog OZ8I Ipper smupssofiq (QE6] WeNIS) yoAUY spAuposusv 67 ‘[JaMplvg. _ eajouve fo Ajsano ojoyd ‘yIed JeuOeN Odojyenyd :ejenzeua, ‘snyjajsojoD NOQI/ISS/ALd F 0} j4odas sno 1aid ay] 0} SUOI)IPPY * canis mame SIRECS ATMA BEET t SouIpnysa | VITILdad aepnuopompeld Byepned DUP] (SS ee wut emmpopomwma| sronmuagnremRepom@T| Td TREES) I [ee 0 a Ep Vi SSE DPEUTS Ge a ee] EP ee EC) ye le 4 ADUIJOUL Sisuapliou IDSLOADU apaapany x DUDAA]]IPs4OI S| | GTO 7) ET Fs |e ae SE ae | cepjvugcubUct |Z ee 4 WUNIDIUOANI] spnoanp ume, | 4 Snuipud Te) aepiuafonuad Ofm| = 1JaUOIIDUL wagqny pyjaudaydoas y LOUDLIOS ‘Vv snyoucyacxo Vv sisuaifpqnonut ‘Vv AIBIINAD v SISUAAIUOGADI SNAO]AIW aepiuojng BaMoU UE eee einuy VIGIHd NV SSVTO S3A1Lday GNV SNVIEIHdWNV NVISNZANSA GSYSONVGNA AO LSITMOSHOD :2 XIGNAddV 68 Plate 48 Plate 51 mats Plate 52 Plate captions: 47. The Venezuelan Andes. The versants of the mountains are covered with lush forests, mainly of cloud type; at the top, the paramo develops. The Bolivar Peak, covered by ice, is the highest point in the country. Venezuela, Mérida. 48. Coastal Range in north-central Venezuela. The northern tradewinds dry up the sea-facing environments producing a semixeric or xeric ecosystem. Venezuela, Aragua. 49. The Llanos of Venezuela is one of the largest and more homogeneous biomes of the county These flatlands develop between the Andes and the Coastal Range to the north, and the Apure—Orinoco rivers to the south. Venezuela, Barinas. 50. In the Venezuelan Guayana appears the tepuis, isolates tabletop mountains, that dominated the landscape. The lower lands are covered by praliies, as the Gran Sabana, or by forests, as the largest part of the states of Bolivar and Amazonas. Venezuela, Bolivar. 51. A view of he inside of San Eusebio cloud forest, in the Venezuelan Andes. Tree ferns and bromelids are characteristics. Venezuela, Mérida. 52. Where dense clouds coming from the Caribbean Sea hit the mountains, a dense cloud forest appears at the upper parts of the Coastal Range. One of the best known is Rancho Grande, on the road from Maracay to Ocumare. Venezuela, Aragua. 0} ejanzeue/ Wo ‘sep i Become a member of Asiatic Herpetological Research Asiatic Herpetological Research Volume 8 ® 1999 TS Editor Ermi Zhao Chengdu Institute of Biology, Academia Sinica. Chengdu, Sichuan, China Associate Editors Kellar Autumn Lewis & Clark College. Portland, Oregon, USA J. Robert Macey Department of Biology, Washington University, St. Louis Missouri, USA Theodore J. Papenfuss Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, University of California Berkeley. California, USA Editorial Board Kraig Adler Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, USA Natalia B. Ananjeva Zoological Institute, St. Petersburg. Russia Steven C. Anderson University of the Pacific. Stockton, California, USA Aaron Bauer Villanova University, Villanova, Pennsylvania, USA Christopher Bell University of Texas. Austin. Texas, USA Leo Borkin Zoological Institute, St. Petersburg, Russia Bihui Chen Anhui Normal University, Wubu. Anhui. China I-jiunn Cheng Institute of Marine Biology, National Taiwan Ocean University Keelung, Taiwan. China Ilya Darevsky Zoological Institute, St. Petersburg, Russia Indraneil Das Madras Crocodile Bank, Vadanemmeli Perur. Madras, India William E. Duellman University of Kansas. Lawrence, Kansas. USA Hajime Fukada > He Xiang Ji Hangzhou Normal College, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China Pi-peng Li Yantai Normal College. Yantai, Shandong. China Ronald Marlow University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Nevada, USA Robert W. Murphy Royal Ontario Museum, Toronto, Ontario, Canada Goren Nilson University of Gdteborg, Goteborg, Sweden Nikolai Orlov Zoological Institute. St. Petersburg, Russia Hidetoshi Ota Department of Biology, University of the Ryukyus. Nishihara Okinawa. Japan James F. Parham University of California. Berkeley, Califormia, USA Soheila Shafi University of Shahid Bahonar, Kerman, Iran i-tao Shi Hainan Normal University, Haikou, Hainan, China Xiu-ling Wang Xinjiang Normal University. Urumqi. Xinjiang, China Yue-zhao Wang Sennyuji Sannaicho, Higashiyamaku, Kyoto, Japan Chengdu Institute of Biology, Academia Sinica, Chengdu, Sichuan, China Carl Gans Yehudah Werner University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA Hebrew University. Jerusalem. Israel! Robert F. Inger Ken-tang Zhao Field Museum, Chicago, Illinois, USA Suzhou Railway Teacher's College, Suzhou. Jiangsu China Asiatic Herpetological Research is published by the Asiatic Herpetological Research Society (AHRS) and the Chinese So- ciety for the Study of Amphibians and Repules (CSSAR) at the Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, University of California. The editors encourage authors from all countries to submit articles concerning but not limited to Asian herpetology. All correspon- dence outside of China and requests for subscription should be sent to AHR. Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, University of California, Berkeley, California, USA 94720, or by email to asiaherp @uclink.berkeley.edu. All correspondence within Chi- na should be sent to Ermi Zhao, Editor, Chengdu Institute of Biology, P-O. Box 416, Chengdu, Sichuan Province, China, Au- thors should consult Guidelines for Manuscript Preparation and Submission at the end of this issue. Subscription and membership are $25 per year ($45 for libraries). Postage outside of the USA and China, please add $5 per issue for surface mail or $10 per issue for air mail. Make checks or money orders payable in US currency to AHRS. If you do not have access to US currency. please notify us, and we will make other arrangements. Asiatic Herpetological Research Volume 8 succeeds Volume 7 published in,1997. Vol. 6 published in 1995, Vol. 5 published in 1993, Vol. 4 published in 1992, Vol. 3 published in 1990 and Chinese Herpetological Research Vol. 2, which was pub- lished at the Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1988-1989 as the journal for the Chinese Society for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles. Volume 2 succeeded Chinese Herpetological Research 1987, published for the Chengdu Institute of Biology by the Chongqing Branch Scientific and Technological Literature Press, Chongqing, Sichuan, China. Acta Herpetologica Sinica ceased publication in June, 1988 Cover: Cuora galbinifrons. Diaoluoshan, 18 km N. of Nanxi, Hainan Province, China. Photo by James F. Parham = “o a These articles will appear in Volume 9 - Due out in SPRING 2001 Asiatic Herpetological Research Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, University of California, Berkeley, California 94720 Fax: (510) 643-7706; email: asiaherp@uclink.berkeley.edu , SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION LI | "HULU rae "8. THE AMPHIBIANS | part LIZARDS, TURTLES =m TWO & CROCODILIANS , Part3 The Amphibians ‘ ident icat : nust f : er. | Order Number: WW-0372 Windward Publishing ss | A Division of Finney Company