See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/325283737

An updated checklist of the herpetofauna from Guerrero, Mexico

Article  in  Zootaxa · May 2018

DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4422.1.1

CITATIONS READS

0 163

2 authors:

Ricardo Palacios Aguilar Oscar Alberto Flores-Villela

Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
17 PUBLICATIONS   2 CITATIONS    139 PUBLICATIONS   2,497 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Inventario multitaxonómico del Área de Protección de Flora y Fauna, Cerro del Mohinora, Chihuahua, México View project

Natural history of mexican Lizard´s View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Ricardo Palacios Aguilar on 28 May 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Zootaxa 4422 (1): 001–024 ISSN 1175-5326 (print edition)
http://www.mapress.com/j/zt/
Copyright © 2018 Magnolia Press
Article ZOOTAXA
ISSN 1175-5334 (online edition)
https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4422.1.1
http://zoobank.org/urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:9D823B4C-35AF-4570-87B7-65DF5E803B4A

An updated checklist of the herpetofauna from Guerrero, Mexico

RICARDO PALACIOS-AGUILAR1,2,3 & OSCAR FLORES-VILLELA2

1
Facultad de Estudios Superiores Iztacala, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (UNAM), Av. de los Barrios, Tlalnepantla de
Baz, Estado de México, CP 54090, México
2
Museo de Zoología “Alfonso L. Herrera”, Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (UNAM), A.P. 70-399,
México D.F., CP 04510, México
3
Corresponding author. E-mail: ricardopalaciosaguilar@gmail.com

Abstract

We present an updated checklist of the amphibians and reptiles for the state of Guerrero, Mexico. This list is based on
bibliographic records, the revision of scientific collections and the authors’ field notes. The herpetofauna of the state in-
cludes 259 species (78 amphibians, 181 reptiles), of which three are introduced. The conservation status of all native spe-
cies was assessed using three independent systems (NOM-059, IUCN and EVS). Finally, the geographic distribution of
amphibians and reptiles is discussed in the context of both the biogeographic provinces within the state and the influence
of road location on specimen collection patterns.

Key words: Amphibians, Reptiles, Fauna list, southern Mexico, distribution

Introduction

One of the most interesting groups to study in Mexico is the herpetofauna, currently composed of approximately
864 reptiles (Flores-Villela & García-Vázquez, 2014) and 376 amphibians (Parra-Olea et al., 2014). The group is
best represented in the southern regions, which are also the least studied parts of the country.
Owing to its complex topography and climatic variation, the southern Mexican state of Guerrero harbors a rich
flora and fauna and is considered the fourth most diverse state in the country (Flores-Villela & Gerez, 1994). Its
herpetofauna has been studied both partially (e. g.: Davis & Dixon 1959, 1961,1965; Flores-Villela & Hernández-
García, 2006; Flores-Villela & Muñoz-Alonso, 1993; Hall, 1951; Sánchez & López-Forment, 1988) and totally
(Pérez-Ramos, 2005; Pérez-Ramos et al., 2000; Saldaña-de la Riva & Pérez-Ramos, 1987) by many authors.
However, further effort is still required to assess it in a comprehensive way.
Recently, many studies reporting new species, new state records and changes in taxonomy that modify the
previous checklist for the state (Pérez-Ramos et al., 2000) have been published and agree with this study and others
that indicate that many other species will be recorded for Guerrero in the future (Flores-Villela & García-Vázquez,
2014). Here, we present an updated and reviewed checklist of the herpetofauna from Guerrero based on field work,
museum and literature records.
History of the study of the herpetofauna of Guerrero, Mexico.—The oldest reptile species described from
Guerrero is Sceloporus omiltemanus, described by Günther in 1890. Until recently, the earliest species to have been
first discovered in Guerrero was believed to be Bipes canaliculatus, however, Flores-Villela et al. (2004b)
discovered that the type locality of this taxon was originally Tancítaro, Michoacán, instead of Mexcala (sic),
Guerrero to which it had been restricted by Smith & Taylor (1950a).
The presence of the Port of Acapulco in the state and the later construction of the highway from Mexico City to
Acapulco made the first explorations in the state possible, and many of the specimens were collected in localities
near the highway. However, the complex topography of the region in addition to the lack of proper communication
routes have limited further studies (Flores-Villela et al., 2004a).
The first expeditions into Guerrero were those of Francisco Hernández, a well-known naturalist who travelled

Accepted by S. Carranza: 27 Mar. 2018; published: 22 May 2018 1

to many parts of New Spain between 1570 and 1577, visiting some localities from the Sierra de Taxco mountain
range and the Balsas Depression region (Flores-Villela et al., 2004a).
Herbert H. Smith and his wife collected many specimens in the 1880s in the central Sierra Madre del Sur
mountain range, mainly in the surroundings of the village of Omiltemi (sometimes misspelled Omilteme) and their
results were included in the Reptilia-Batrachia volume by Albert Günther (Günther, 1885-1902) from the important
series, Biologia Centrali-Americana.
At the beginning of the last century, Hans Friedrich Gadow, a naturalist who was especially interested in the
study of amphibians and reptiles, conducted extensive field work in several localities in the Sierra Madre del Sur
mountain range, the Balsas Depression, and the coastal plains of the Pacific Ocean (Gadow, 1908).
From the 1940s onwards, what could be called the modern study of the herpetofauna emerged. Hobart M.
Smith and Edward H. Taylor are undoubtedly required references for this era. Their enormous work on the
amphibians and reptiles of Mexico, and particularly their keys and lists for the different groups (1945, 1948, 1950b,
compiled and reprinted in 1966) provide the first formal listing of the 168 species they recorded for Guerrero: 42
amphibians and 126 reptiles.
The next decade (1950) was characterized by the publication of several studies that briefly discussed and
reported small collections made along transects delimited by roads, such as the work of Hall (1951), Holman
(1964) and Liner & Dundee (1969) that resulted in the description of new species or new records. Other studies
were more extensive, such as the series of articles published by Davis & Dixon (1959, 1961, 1965) on the
herpetofauna of the region of Chilpancingo and that of nearby or interesting areas such as Mezcala, Tixtla or Tierra
Colorada; the product of extensive collections made by the authors and their students.
One other author worth noting is Kraig Adler who during the 1960s explored the western mountain ranges of
Guerrero and whit his group of colleagues described several new species of amphibians, and posited the first
hypotheses about the distribution of these organisms in the region (Adler, 1965, 1996; Adler & Dennis, 1972;
Papenfuss et al., 1983 [1984]; Snyder, 1972).
Between the 1970s and the first decade of the 21st century, numerous new species of amphibians (Snyder,
1972; Papenfuss et al., 1983 [1984]; Savage, 1984; Hillis et al., 1984; Hanken et al., 1999) and reptiles (Smith &
Savitszky, 1972; Myers & Campbell, 1981) were described. Also noteworthy are the regional lists for Las Juntas de
Cujarán (Lozano-Guzman, 1983), Acapulco (Sánchez & Lopez-Forment, 1987), Omiltemi (Flores-Villela &
Muñoz-Alonso, 1993), and the Sierra de Taxco in Guerrero and the areas bordering the State of Mexico (Flores-
Villela & Hernández-García, 2006).
There are only three comprehensive studies of the state’s herpetofauna after Smith & Taylor (1966): an
unpublished thesis by Saldaña de la Riva & Pérez Ramos (1987) in which they report 187 species and present a
bibliographical compilation of records of herpetozoa and discuss species distribution based on climate types;
Pérez-Ramos et al. (2000), who provide the last formal update of the list and report 216 species (232 "forms"
taking into account subspecies and synonyms); and an unpublished Master of Science thesis in which Pérez-Ramos
(2005) suggests a biogeographic hypothesis only for the state reptiles, but concludes that there is no apparent
pattern to their distribution in the area and that their distribution pattern is heterogeneous.
Since the last update of the checklist there has been a considerable increase in the knowledge of the
herpetofauna of Guerrero. In the last 15 years, several new species have been described (Wilson & Campbell,
2000; Campbell & Flores-Villela, 2008; Pérez-Ramos & Saldaña-de La Riva, 2008; Murphy et al., 2009; Campbell
et al., 2009; Pavón-Vázquez et al., 2011; Jadin et al., 2011; Feria-Ortiz & García-Vázquez, 2012; Campbell et al.,
2013; Köhler et al., 2014; Nieto-Montes de Oca et al., 2014; Campbell et al., 2014) and many new state records
have recently been reported.

Materials and methods

Study site. The Mexican state of Guerrero is located in southern Mexico between the coordinates 18°54’-16°18’ N
and 97°57’-102°11’ W. It has an area of 63, 620.67 km2, which represents 3.2% of the national territory and makes
it the 14th largest state in Mexico (INEGI, 2012). There are four biogeographic regions in Guerrero, from north to
south: The Trans-Mexican Volcanic Belt, the Balsas Depression, the Sierra Madre del Sur, and the Pacific Coast
(CONABIO, 1997; Fig. 1).

2 · Zootaxa 4422 (1) © 2018 Magnolia Press PALACIOS-AGUILAR & FLORES-VILLELA

FIGURE 1. Biogeographic provinces in Guerrero, México. From north to south: TMVB: Trans-Mexican Volcanic Belt; BD:
Balsas Depression; SMS: Sierra Madre del Sur Mountain Range; PC: Pacific Coast.

Data collection. Records presented herein come mostly from the literature, museum records obtained from the
electronic portals GBIF (www.gbif.org), VertNet (www.vertnet.org), and the scientific collections deposited in the
Colección Nacional de Anfibios y Reptiles (CNAR), Museo de Zoología “Alfonso L. Herrera”, Facultad de
Ciencias (MZFC), the University of Texas at Arlington (UTA), and the Instituto de Investigaciones Científicas,
Universidad Autónoma de Guerrero (UAGRO); as well as independent field work by the authors. Occurrence
information was arranged on the basis of the biogeographic provinces in the state, and elevation ranges were
obtained from the literature, databases and field notes made by us.
Once a preliminary version of the species list was compiled its nomenclature was updated based on the most
recent taxonomic changes proposed since Flores-Villela & Canseco-Márquez (2004), and following the systematic
arrangement of Flores-Villela (1993).
Conservation status follows three classification systems: the Norma Oficial Mexicana (Semarnat, 2010), the
International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN, 2016) and the Environmental Vulnerability Score
(Wilson et al., 2013a, b).

Results

We obtained a list of 259 herpetofauna species, 78 of which are amphibians (13 families, 29 genera) and 181 of
which are reptiles (32 families, 80 genera; Appendix 1). The majority of these species are native with three
exceptions: Hemidactylus frenatus and Indotyphlops braminus are natural to the Eastern Hemisphere and Apalone
spinifera was introduced to the rivers of the Balsas Depression in the 1950s (Lemos-Espinal et al., 1999).
Most of the amphibians’ diversity is found in the Sierra Madre del Sur (69 species), followed by the Pacific
Coast (28), the Balsas Depression (19) and the Trans-Mexican Volcanic Belt (14). Reptiles have a similar pattern
with the greatest species richness found in the Sierra Madre del Sur with 124 species, followed by the Pacific Coast
(94), the Balsas Depression (71) and the Trans-Mexican Volcanic Belt (33). This brings us to a total of 194 species
in the Sierra Madre del Sur, 122 in the Pacific Coast, 90 in the Balsas Depression and 47 in the Trans-Mexican

HERPETOFAUNA OF GUERRERO, MÉXICO Zootaxa 4422 (1) © 2018 Magnolia Press · 3

Volcanic Belt. Of these species, 180 are Mexican endemics (57 amphibians, 123 reptiles), and 55 are exclusive
state endemics (26 amphibians, 29 reptiles). These endemisms represent slightly more than 14.5 % of the Mexican
herpetofauna. The families with highest proportions of endemism are Hylidae, Craugastoridae,
Eleutherodactylidae, Ranidae and Plethodontidae for amphibians. For reptiles, endemism is highest in
Phrynosomatidae, Dactyloidae, Teiidae, Colubridae, Dipsadidae and Viperidae. The majority of endemic species
are distributed in the Sierra Madre del Sur biogeographic province.
Of all the species, 76 are under special protection (Pr) by Mexican law (15 amphibians, 61 reptiles), 28 are
threatened (A; 8 amphibians, 20 reptiles) and five are considered at risk of extinction (P; 1 amphibian, 4 reptiles).
According to the IUCN 123 species are of Least Concern (30 amphibians, 93 reptiles), four are Near Threatened
(two amphibians, two reptiles), 13 are Vulnerable (seven amphibians, six reptiles), 20 Endangered (15 amphibians,
5 reptiles), 12 Critically Endangered (nine amphibians, three reptiles), 19 Data Deficient (seven amphibians, 12
reptiles), and the rest lack assessment. The Environmental Vulnerability Score lists 64 species as of low
vulnerability (19 amphibians, 45 reptiles), 75 as medium vulnerability (27 amphibians, 48 reptiles) and 113 as
highly vulnerable (32 amphibians, 81 reptiles).
In the last two decades, over 40 new records have been reported within the state. These additions are
represented by 14 new species, 27 state records and two taxonomic changes at the species level. These records are
represented by nine amphibians and 32 reptile species.
Additionally, ten new state records resulted from our revision of museum records. Of these, five are first
reported in the present update (Coniophanes imperialis, Dipsas gaigeae, Imantodes cenchoa, Leptophis mexicanus
and Tantilla rubra), and five other were reported by various authors during the preparation of this update
(Eleutherodactylus syristes by García-Vázquez et al., 2016; Porthidium hespere by Palacios-Aguilar et al., 2016;
Exerodonta smaragdina by Palacios-Aguilar et al., 2018; C. lateritius by Palacios-Aguilar et al., in press; and
Anolis quercorum by Jiménez-Arcos, in litt; Appendix 2). These new records and new species represent an increase
of nearly 14% with respect to the previous list provided by Pérez-Ramos et al. (2000).
The records obtained from the literature, databases and museum records represent almost every species
previously reported in the past. However, the distribution of five particular species should be discussed herein:
Geophis sieboldi: The taxonomic status of this species has been always enigmatic. Jan (1862) reported its type
locality simply as “Messico (M.) Guadalupa”, with no further detail regarding the exact locality. Furthermore,
Downs (1967) reported that the original type series was destroyed during World War II, and provided a diagnosis
on the basis of seven additional specimens: five with no associated locality data (ZMB 1555–59), one from
Coalcomán, Michoacán (UMMZ 104698), and one from Amula (=Almolonga), Guerrero (BMNH 1890.4.24.12).
Until a new species of the G. sieboldi group from Guerrero was described, no formal revision on the identity of the
Guerrero specimen was given, and it was suspected that it was G. occabus rather than G. sieboldi. The revision of
the specimen, and the procurement of a specimen of G. occabus from central Guerrero (Palacios-Aguilar et al.,
2016) provide evidence that previous reports on G. sieboldi from Guerrero were longtime misidentifications.
However, there are specimens deposited in museum collections (MZFC 25527, 27004–6) that could refer to this
species but whose taxonomic identity requires verification as they could represent an unnamed species (L.
Canseco-Márquez, personal communication).
Leptophis ahaetulla: Saldaña de la Riva and Pérez Ramos (1987) included this snake in their comprehensive
work, mentioning that it was represented in the Colección Nacional de Anfibios y Reptiles (CNAR 10242).
Additionally, the VertNet electronic portal shows a record of this species deposited in the Cornell University
Museum of Vertebrates (CUMV 9810), from “Viveros “El Huayacán”, Acapulco”, the same locality from which
Saldaña de la Riva and Pérez Ramos record comes from. After examining both specimens it was concluded that
they represent L. diplotropis, hence this taxon was deleted from the final list.
Rena humilis: This species was reported as new state record by Pérez-Ramos et al. (2000). However,
references to the specimens on which this record was based are lacking and no museum specimens were obtained,
thus we think that the species should be removed from this checklist.
Sceloporus asper: This lizard species was originally reported in Guerrero by Ernst Ahl (1934) from the village
of Chilapa de Álvarez, and apparently on that same expedition other interesting specimens were secured, such as
the holotype of Ptychohyla leonhardschultzei. However, the record of S. asper offers no detailed data or references
that could help us correctly ascertain the proper identity of the specimens or to allocate them to a scientific
collection. A detailed inspection on the record revealed that the species was listed by Hobart Smith in his

4 · Zootaxa 4422 (1) © 2018 Magnolia Press PALACIOS-AGUILAR & FLORES-VILLELA

monographic study of the genus (Smith, 1939) and since that publication has been reported for Guerrero by other
authors. A single specimen not revised by us, deposited in the California Academy of Sciences (CAS 143938), is
referred to as “Sceloporus cf asper”, but this and other references to the species should be considered tentative and
inconclusive.
Xenodon rabdocephalus: This species was first reported by Boulenger (1894) from “Amula (=Almolonga)”, in
the central region of Guerrero. Taylor & Smith (1938) cite this specimen without offering any other information
and Duellman (1965) reports the species for the coastal plains of the state with no precise locality data or reference
to voucher specimens. The GBIF electronic portal reports a specimen (MZFC 1794) of X. rabdocephalus, but on
examination we realized that it is actually a juvenile Mastigodryas melanolomus. We have kept this species on our
checklist because we were able to examine the specimen reported by Boulenger deposited at the British Museum of
Natural History (BMNH 1894.1.17.13), and concluded that the species is likely to be extremely rare within the
state or was extirpated from the region during the last century.

Discussion

The herpetofauna of Guerrero is surely one of the most diverse in Mexico. However, over the course of this study it
became evident that it is also one of the least studied regions in the country. When comparing the number of species
reported in other states with such a diverse herpetofauna, such as Chiapas, Oaxaca, Puebla and Veracruz (Flores-
Villela & Gerez, 1994), over time it becomes easier to see this tendency.
In Oaxaca, at the time the work of Perez-Ramos et al. (2000) was published, 359 species had been recorded
(Casas-Andreu et al., 1996). This number increased to 378 eight years later (Casas-Andreu et al., 2004) and is
currently at 430 recorded species (Mata-Silva et al., 2015).
In Chiapas, 326 species were recorded by Alvarez Del Toro et al. (1993) and Reynoso et al. (2011), and the
most recent update found 330 species for the state (Johnson et al., 2015); an increase of only four species.
In Veracruz, 293 species were recorded in 1992 (Pelcastre-Villafuerte & Flores-Villela, 1992) and currently its
herpetofauna diversity is 323 species (Guzmán-Guzmán et al., 2011; Morales-Mávil et al., 2011).
One state for which the study of its herpetofauna recently increased in a remarkable way is Puebla. The only
species list for the state until the beginning of the 2000s was that of Webb & Fugler (1957). It was in the early
2000s that many records were added to the state's herpetofauna, but these were always the product of non-
sequential or systematized inventories (Canseco-Márquez et al., 2000; García-Vázquez et al., 2009a), resulting in
the report of 246 species in the last formal update (García-Vázquez et al., 2009b).
However, in the state of Guerrero there have been many periods during which very little information has been
added to the general knowledge of its herpetofauna. As can be seen in Figure 2, there has been a clear tendency to
increase the number of species in recent years. This is understandable considering the number of unexplored
regions that there are within the state. After we analyzed the general distribution patterns of the herpetofauna we
found that they are strongly marked by the main highways and communication routes in the state (Fig. 3), leaving
extensive regions with no formal surveys or with scattered records, as stated by Bojórquez-Tapia et al. (1994,
1995).
The study of the mountainous areas on both sides of Guerrero is essential since they have been recognized as
regions of endemism in this and other states (Pérez-Ramos et al., 2000, Ochoa-Ochoa & Flores-Villela, 2005;
Mata-Silva et al., 2015), and there is a high probability of discovering new species in them. Regions such as the
Pacific Coast and the Balsas Depression are equally important as they function as corridors along their entire length
and at the same time as barriers that allow for the existence of endemisms (Flores-Villela & Goyenechea, 2001;
Wilson & Campbell, 2000; Papenfuss, 1982). Finally, the mountainous areas in the north of the state represent a
biological corridor of one of the most interesting, diverse, and important regions in the country: the Trans-Mexican
Volcanic Belt. Unfortunately, this area has perhaps received the least amount of attention, with very few formal
studies (Flores-Villela & Hernández-García, 2006).
The pattern observed for amphibians and reptiles is not particular to the group, but is shared with other
vertebrates such as mammals (Ávila Nájera, 2006) and birds (Navarro-Sigüenza, 1998). The collection patterns are
similar in four distinct groups of vertebrates, and all are clearly shaped by roads and dirt roads, a phenomenon
defined as "road syndrome" (Bojórquez-Tapia et al., 1994, 1995). This is due, among other factors, to the fact that

HERPETOFAUNA OF GUERRERO, MÉXICO Zootaxa 4422 (1) © 2018 Magnolia Press · 5

progress in the knowledge of the state's biodiversity has not been homogeneous and has always been dictated by
the presence of roads and highways.
The lack of adequate transportation routes in the region, as well as the rugged terrain that is characteristic of
the area drastically limits sampling. In addition, Guerrero's socioeconomic status is perhaps the most important
factor limiting study and access to areas of interest. Violence and lack of personal safety are also likely to limit
future studies in the state.

FIGURE 2. Cumulative curve of the amphibians and reptiles recorded from Guerrero over the time. Note that a general
tendency to increase is shown, as well as many periods when the species number increase at very low rates or remains static.

The conservation measures intended to protect the different species in Guerrero are still insufficient. In recent
years, this group of organisms has been seriously affected by habitat destruction, climate change and the
occurrence of diseases that have caused the decline and even extirpation of entire populations, especially in
amphibians (Lips et al., 2003; Lips et al., 2004). It has, however, been verified that not all species are disappearing,
as evidenced by work done with non-systematic sampling and short visits to certain localities (Caviedes-Solis et
al., 2015).
Although the three conservation systems used in this study may be complementary, there are no government
bodies or authorities responsible for ensuring they are implemented. NOM-059 has a good approach for
conservation but there are no serious measures to evaluate population status or to control species extraction, and the
IUCN system takes historical ecological factors into account, but does not include real follow-up of populations.
The EVS system considers the biological and ecological characteristics of populations and species and at the same
time assesses the anthropogenic factor that affects them. However, this does not ensure follow-up nor is it endorsed
by any authority to ensure its operation, and the fact that it is subject to constant changes in its structure makes it in
many cases impractical.
The conservation of the herpetofauna in Guerrero is complex and still incomplete. Despite their great diversity
and the fact that Guerrero is a highly biologically rich state, there are very few natural protected areas that ensure
the protection of ecosystems and vulnerable populations in the area (Bezaury-Creel et al., 2012). In addition, recent
reports on habitat destruction have revealed that Guerrero was the state the most affected by forest fires from 2000
to 2014, with an estimated 1,200,921 ha of vegetation and the populations that inhabit them affected (Manzano
Delgado, 2016).

6 · Zootaxa 4422 (1) © 2018 Magnolia Press PALACIOS-AGUILAR & FLORES-VILLELA

FIGURE 3. Recollecting patterns of the herpetofauna from Guerrero. Black squares: amphibians, white circles: reptiles. In
some cases, the symbols overlap due to the scale and the proximity of the localities.

Acknowledgements

We thank E. Pérez Ramos for his invaluable help during the review of specimens and the preparation of the
manuscript, A. Domínguez from MZFC for her valuable help with the databases, E. Beltrán and R. Santos
(UAGRO), J. A. Campbell and C. Franklin (UTA) and V. H. Reynoso (CNAR) for allowing us to access databases
of the collections they curate. M. Wilkinson, P. Campbell (BMNH); K. Martin, S. Rogers (CM); C. M. Dardia, H.
Greene (CUMV); R. Glor, L. Welton, R. Brown (KU); C. C. Austin, S. Parker (LSUMZ); C. Spencer (MVZ); B.
Hollingsworth, L. Kabes (SDNHM); E. Braker (UCM); and G. Watkins (YPM) provided images of specimens
deposited in the collections they curate, and helped corroborate their correct identification. D. Noriega Hidalgo and
A. Jiménez-Martínez prepared the figures. H. Pérez-Mendoza, R. García-Collazo and S. Arias-Balderas provided
very useful corrections and suggestions on the original manuscript of this article that was part of the B.Sc. thesis of
the first author.

Literature cited

Adler, K. (1965) Three new frogs of the genus Hyla from the Sierra Madre del Sur of Mexico. Occasional Papers of the
Museum of Zoology, University of Michigan, 642, 1–18.
Adler, K. (1996) The salamanders of Guerrero, Mexico, with descriptions of five new species of the genus Pseudoeurycea
(Caudata: Plethodontidae). Occasional Papers of the Museum of Natural History, University of Kansas, 177, 1–28.
Adler, K. & Dennis, D.M. (1972) New tree frogs of the genus Hyla from the cloud forest of western Guerrero, Mexico.
Occasional Papers of the Museum of Natural History, University of Kansas, 7, 1–19.
Ahl, E. (1934) Uber eine Sammlung von Reptilien und Amphibien aus Mexiko. Zoologischer Anzeiger, 106, 184–186.
Álvarez del Toro, M., Palacios-Espinoza, E., Cabrera-Cachón, T.G., Guichard Romero, C.A., Ramírez Velázquez, A. & Cartas
Heredia, G. de J. (1993) Chiapas y su biodiversidad. Gobierno del Estado de Chiapas, Tapachula, 152 pp.
Ávila Nájera, D.M. (2006) Patrones de Distribución de la Mastofauna de Guerrero, México. B.Sc. Thesis, Facultad de

HERPETOFAUNA OF GUERRERO, MÉXICO Zootaxa 4422 (1) © 2018 Magnolia Press · 7

 Ciencias, UNAM, México City, 292 pp.
Bezaury-Creel, J.E., Torres-Origel, J.F., Ochoa-Ochoa, L.M. & Castro-Campos, M. (2012) Áreas Naturales Protegidas y Otros
Espacios Destinados a la Conservación, Restauración y Uso Sustentable de la Biodiversidad en México. The Nature
Conservancy/Comisión Nacional para el Conocimiento y Uso de la Biodiversidad/Comisión Nacional de Áreas Naturales
Protegidas, Mexico City, pp.
Bojórquez-Tapia, L.A., Azuara, I., Ezcurra, E. & Flores-Villela, O. (1995) Identifying conservation priorities in Mexico
through geographic information systems and modeling. Ecological Applications, 5 (1), 215–231.
https://doi.org/10.2307/1942065
Bojórquez-Tapia, L.A., Balvanera, P. & Cuarón, A.D. (1994) Biological inventories and computer data bases: their role in
environmental assessments. Environmental Management, 18 (5), 775–785.
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02394640
Boulenger, G.A. (1894) Catalogue of the Snakes in the British Museum (Natural History). Vol. II. 2nd Edition. Printed by The
Trustees, London, 382 pp.
Campbell, J.A. & Flores-Villela, O. (2008) A new long-tailed rattlesnake (Viperidae) from Guerrero, Mexico. Herpetologica,
64 (2), 246–257.
https://doi.org/10.1655/07-054.1
Campbell, J.A., Blancas-Hernández, J.C. & Smith, E.N. (2009) A new species of stream-breeding treefrog of the genus
Charadrahyla (Hylidae) from the Sierra Madre del Sur of Guerrero, Mexico. Copeia, 2009 (2), 287–295.
https://doi.org/10.1643/CH-08-143
Campbell, J.A., Brodie Jr., E.D., Blancas-Hernández, J.C. & Smith, E.N. (2013) Another new salamander of the genus
Pseudoeurycea from the state of Guerrero, Mexico. South American Journal of Herpetology, 8 (3), 198–202.
https://doi.org/10.2994/SAJH-D-13-00026.1
Campbell, J.A., Brodie Jr., E.D., Flores-Villela, O. & Smith, E.N. (2014) A fourth species of minute salamander (Thorius:
Plethodontidae) from the Sierra Madre del Sur of Guerrero, Mexico. South American Journal of Herpetology, 9 (1), 46–51.
https://doi.org/10.2994/SAJH-D-14-00006.1
Canseco-Márquez, L., Gutiérrez-Mayén, G. & Salazar-Arenas, J. (2000) New records and range extensions for amphibians and
reptiles from Puebla, Mexico. Herpetological Review, 31 (4), 259–263.
Casas-Andreu, G., Méndez-de la Cruz, F.R. & Aguilar-Miguel, X. (2004) Anfibios y reptiles. In: García-Mendoza A.J.,
Ordóñez, M.J. & Briones-Salas, M. (Eds.), Biodiversidad de Oaxaca. Instituto de Biología, UNAM, Fondo Oaxaqueño
para la Conservación de la Naturaleza and World Wildlife Fund, México, D.F., pp. 375–390.
Casas-Andreu, G., Méndez-de la Cruz F.R. & Camarillo J.L. (1996) Anfibios y reptiles de Oaxaca. Lista, Distribución y
Conservación. Acta Zoológica Mexicana, New Series, 69, 1–35.
Caviedes-Solis, I.W., Vázquez-Vega, L.F., Solano-Zavaleta, I., Pérez-Ramos, E., Rovito, S.M., Devitt, T.J., Heimes, P., Flores-
Villela, O.A., Campbell, J.A. & Nieto-Montes de Oca A. (2015) Everything is not lost: recent records, rediscoveries, and
range extensions of Mexican hylid frogs. Mesoamerican Herpetology, 2 (3), 229–241.
Comisión Nacional para el Conocimiento y Uso de la Biodiversidad (CONABIO). (1997) Provincias biogeográficas de
México. Scale 1: 4,000,000. Comisión Nacional para el Conocimiento y Uso de la Biodiversidad. México, D.F.
Davis, W.B. & Dixon, J.R. (1959) Snakes of the Chilpancingo region, Mexico. Proceedings of the Biological Society of
Washington, 72, 79–92.
Davis, W.B. & Dixon, J.R. (1961) Reptiles (exclusive of snakes) of the Chilpancingo region, Mexico. Proceedings of the
Biological Society of Washington, 74, 37–56.
Davis, W.B. & Dixon, J.R. (1965) Amphibians of the Chilpancingo region, Mexico. Herpetologica, 20 (4), 225–233.
Downs, F.L. (1967) Intrageneric relationships among the colubrid snakes of the genus Geophis Wagler. Miscellaneous
Publications of the Museum of Zoology, University of Michigan, 131, 1–193.
Duellman, W.E. (1965) A biogeographic account of the herpetofauna of Michoacán, Mexico. University of Kansas
Publications Museum of Natural History, 15 (4), 627–709.
Feria-Ortiz, M. & García-Vázquez, U.O. (2012) A new species of Plestiodon (Squamata: Scincidae) from Sierra Madre del Sur
of Guerrero, Mexico. Zootaxa, 3339, 57–68.
Flores-Villela, O. (1993) Herpetofauna Mexicana. Carnegie Museum of Natural History Special Publication, 17, 1–73.
Flores-Villela, O. & Canseco-Márquez, L. (2004) Nuevas especies y cambios taxonómicos para la Herpetofauna de México.
Acta Zoológica Mexica, New Series, 20 (2), 115–144.
Flores-Villela, O. & García-Vázquez, U.O. (2014) Biodiversidad de reptiles en México. Revista Mexicana de Biodiversidad, 85
(Suplemento), 467–475.
https://doi.org/10.7550/rmb.4326
Flores-Villela, O. & Gerez, P. (1994) Biodiversidad y Conservación en México: vertebrados, vegetación y uso de suelo. 2nd
Edition. CONABIO, México, D.F., 439 pp.
Flores-Villela, O. & Goyenechea, I. (2001) A comparison of hypotheses of historical area relationships for Mexico and Central
America, or in search for the lost pattern. In: Johnson, J., Webb, R.G. & Flores-Villela, O. (Eds.), Mesoamerican
Herpetology: systematics, zoogeography, and conservation. Centennial Museum, Special Publication, University of Texas,
El Paso, Texas, pp. 171–181.
Flores-Villela, O. & Hernández-García, E. (2006) Herpetofauna de la Sierra de Taxco, Guerrero-Estado de México. In:

8 · Zootaxa 4422 (1) © 2018 Magnolia Press PALACIOS-AGUILAR & FLORES-VILLELA

 Ramírez-Bautista, A., Canseco-Márquez, L. & Mendoza-Quijano, F. (Eds.), Inventarios Herpetofaunísticos de México:
Avances en el conocimiento de su Biodiversidad. Publicaciones de la Sociedad Herpetológica Mexicana, No. 3, pp.
266–282.
Flores-Villela, O. & Muñoz-Alonso, A. (1993) Anfibios y Reptiles. In: Luna-Vega, I. & Llorente-Bousquets, J. (Eds.), Historia
natural del Parque Ecológico Estatal Omiltemi, Chilpancingo, Guerrero, México. CONABIO-UNAM, México, D.F., pp.
411–442.
Flores-Villela O., Smith, H.M. & Chiszar, D. (2004a) The History of Herpetological Exploration in Mexico. Bonner
zoologische Beiträge, 52 (3/4), 311–335.
Flores-Villela O., Smith, H.M., Chiszar, D. & Zamudio G. (2004b) Long-neglected information on the discovery of Bipes
(Reptilia: Amphisbaenia). Newsletter and Bulletin of the International Society for the History and Bibliography of
Herpetology, 5 (1), 18–22.
Gadow, H.F. (1908) Through southern Mexico, being an account of the travels of a naturalist. Witherby & Co., London, 527
pp.
García-Vázquez, U.O., Canseco-Márquez, L., Aguilar-López, J.L., Solano-Zavaleta, I. & Maceda-Cruz, R.J. (2009a)
Noteworthy Records of Amphibians and Reptiles from Puebla, México. Herpetological Review, 40 (4), 467–470.
García-Vázquez, U.O., Canseco-Márquez, L., Gutiérrez-Mayén, G. & Trujano-Ortega, M. (2009b) Actualización del
Conocimiento de la Fauna Herpetológica del Estado de Puebla, México. Boletín de la Sociedad Herpetológica Mexicana,
17 (1), 12–36.
Günther, A.C.L.G. (1885–1902) Biologia Centrali-Americana: Reptilia and Batrachia. Published for the editors by Porter,
R.H., London. Available from: www.sil.si.edu/digitalcollections/bca/navigation/bca_04_00_00/bca_04_00_00select.cfm
(accessed 8 July 2015)
Guzmán-Guzmán, S., Morales-Mávil, J.E. & Pineda Arredondo, E.O. (2011) Anfibios. In: Comisión Nacional para el
Conocimiento y Uso de la Biodiversidad. La biodiversidad en Veracruz: Estudio de Estado. Comisión Nacional para el
Conocimiento y Uso de la Biodiversidad, Gobierno del Estado de Veracruz, Universidad Veracruzana, Instituto de
Ecología, A.C., Xalapa, pp. 517–529.
Hall, C.W. (1951). Notes on a small herpetological collection from Guerrero. Kansas University Science Bulletin, 34 (4),
201–212.
Hanken, J., Wake D.B. & Freeman, H.L. (1999) Three new species of minute salamanders (Thorius: Plethodontidae) from
Guerrero, Mexico, including the report of a novel dental polymorphism in urodeles. Copeia, 1999 (4), 917–931.
https://doi.org/10.2307/1447967
Hillis, D.M., Frost, J.S. & Webb, R.G. (1984) A new species of frog of the Rana tarahumarae group from southern Mexico.
Copeia, 1984 (2), 398–403.
https://doi.org/ 10.2307/1445197
Holman, J.A. (1964) New and interesting amphibians and reptiles from Guerrero and Oaxaca, Mexico. Herpetologica, 20 (1),
48–54.
Instituto Nacional de Estadística, Geografía e Informática (INEGI) (2012) Anuario estadístico de Guerrero 2012. Instituto
Nacional de Estadística, Geografía e Informática, Gobierno del Estado de Guerrero, México, 612 pp.
International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN). (2016) The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2015-4.
Available from: http://www.iucnredlist.org (accessed 18 February 2016)
Jadin, R.C., Smith, E.N. & Campbell, J.A. (2011) Unravelling a tangle of Mexican serpents: a systematic revision of highland
pitvipers. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society, 163, 943–958.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1096-3642.2011.00748.x
Jan, G. (1862) Enumerazione sistematica delle specie d’ofidi del gruppo Calamaridae. Archivio per la Zoologia, II, 1–76.
Johnson, J.D., Mata-Silva, V., García-Padilla E. & Wilson, L.D. (2015) The herpetofauna of Chiapas, Mexico: composition,
physiographic distribution, and conservation status. Mesoamerican Herpetology, 2 (3), 272–329.
Köhler, G., Gómez-Trejo Pérez, R., Petersen, C.B.P. & Méndez- De la Cruz, F.R. (2014) A revision of the Mexican Anolis
(Reptilia, Squamata, Dactyloidae) from the Pacific versant west of the Isthmus of Tehuantepec in the states of Oaxaca,
Guerrero, and Puebla, with the description of six new species. Zootaxa, 3862 (1), 1–210.
https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.3862.1.1
Lemos-Espinal, J., Webb R.G. & Smith, H.M. (1999) Emory’s softshell turtle, Apalone spinifera emoryi, in Mexico. Bulletin of
the Maryland Herpetological Society, 35 (2), 40–42.
Liner, E.A. & Dundee, H.A. (1969) Notes on reptiles and amphibians from southern Guerrero and Oaxaca, Mexico. The
Southwestern Naturalist, 14 (1), 129–134.
Lips, K.R., Mendelson III, J.R., Muñoz-Alonso, A., Canseco- Márquez, L. & Mulcahy, D.G. (2004) Amphibian population
declines in montane southern Mexico: resurveys of historical localities. Biological Conservation, 119, 555–564.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2004.01.017
Lips, K.R., Reeve, J. & Witters, L.R. (2003) Ecological factors predicting amphibian population declines in Central America.
Conservation Biology, 17, 1078–1088.
https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1523-1739.2003.01623.x
Lozano-Guzmán, F. (1983) Estudios preliminares acerca de la fauna del Estado de Guerrero (Vertebrados Terrestres).
Universidad Autónoma de Guerrero, Dirección de Publicaciones, México, Serie Técnico Científica, No. 8., 62 pp.

HERPETOFAUNA OF GUERRERO, MÉXICO Zootaxa 4422 (1) © 2018 Magnolia Press · 9

Mata-Silva, V., Johnson, J.D., Wilson, L.D. & García-Padilla, E. (2015) The herpetofauna of Oaxaca, México: composition,
physiographic distribution, and conservation status. Mesoamerican Herpetology, 2 (1), 6–62
Morales-Mávil, J.E., Guzmán-Guzmán, S., Canseco-Márquez, L., Pérez-Higareda, G., González-Romero, A. & Vogt, R.C.
(2011) Reptiles. In: Comisión Nacional para el Conocimiento y Uso de la Biodiversidad. La biodiversidad en Veracruz:
estudio de estado. Comisión Nacional para el Conocimiento y Uso de la Biodiversidad, Gobierno del Estado de Veracruz,
Universidad Veracruzana, Instituto de Ecología, A.C., México, pp. 531–543.
Manzano Delgado, L.D. (2016) Incendios forestales de gran relevancia: algoritmos y sensor MODIS para su detección y
monitoreo. In: Moncada Maya, O. & López López, A. (Eds.), Geografía de México: Una reflexión espacial
contemporánea. Instituto de Geografía, UNAM, México, pp. 310–322
Murphy, R.W., Blair, C. & Méndez-De la Cruz, F.R. (2009) A new species of leaf-toed gecko, genus Phyllodactylus (Squamata,
Gekkota, Phyllodactylidae) from Guerrero, Mexico. South American Journal of Herpetology, 4 (1), 17–24.
https://doi.org/10.2994/057.004.0103
Myers, C.W. & Campbell, J.A. (1981) A new genus and species of colubrid snake from the Sierra Madre del Sur of Guerrero,
Mexico. American Museum Novitates, 2708, 1–20.
Navarro-Sigüenza, A. (1998) Distribución geográfica y ecológica de la avifauna del estado de Guerrero, México. Ph.D.
Dissertation, Facultad de Ciencias, UNAM, México, 182 pp.
Nieto-Montes de Oca, A., Arenas-Moreno, D., Beltrán-Sánchez, E. & Leaché, A.D. (2014) A new species of horned lizard
(Genus Phrynosoma) from Guerrero, México, with an updated multilocus phylogeny. Herpetologica, 70 (2), 241–257.
https://doi.org/10.1655/HERPETOLOGICA-D-13-00077
Ochoa-Ochoa, L.M. & Flores Villela, O. (2006) Áreas de diversidad y endemismo de la herpetofauna mexicana. UNAM-
CONABIO, México, 211 pp.
Palacios-Aguilar, R., Jiménez-Martínez, A.E. & Flores-Villela, O. (2018) Primeros registros de Exerodonta smaragdina
(Amphibia: Hylidae) en Guerrero, México. Revista Mexicana de Biodiversidad, 89 (1), 309–312.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rmb.2018.01.001
Palacios-Aguilar R., Santos-Bibiano, R. & Beltrán-Sánchez, E. (2016) Notable distributional records of amphibians and
reptiles from Guerrero, Mexico. Mesoamerican Herpetology, 3 (2), 527–531.
Papenfuss, T.J. (1982) The ecology and systematics of the amphisbaenian genus Bipes. Occasional Papers of the California
Academy of Sciences, 136, 1–42.
Papenfuss T.J., Wake, D.B. & Adler, K. (1983 [1984]) Salamanders of the genus Bolitoglossa from the Sierra Madre del Sur of
Southern Mexico. Journal of Herpetology, 17 (4), 295–307.
https://doi.org/10.2307/1563582
Parra-Olea, G., Flores-Villela, O. & Mendoza-Almeralla, C. (2014) Biodiversidad de anfibios en México. Revista Mexicana de
Biodiversidad, 85 (Suplemento), 460–466.
https://doi.org/ 10.7550/rmb.32027
Pavón-Vázquez, C.J., García-Vázquez, U.O., Blancas-Hernández, J.C. & Nieto-Montes de Oca, A. (2011) A new species of the
Geophis sieboldi group (Squamata: Colubridae) exhibiting color pattern polymorphism from Guerrero, Mexico.
Herpetologica, 67 (3), 332–343.
https://doi.org/10.1655/HERPETOLOGICA-D-11-00003.1
Pelcastre-Villafuerte, L. & Flores-Villela, O. (1992) Lista de especies y localidades de recolecta de la herpetofauna de Veracruz,
México. Publicaciones Especiales del Museo de Zoología, Facultad de Ciencias, 4, 25–96.
Pérez-Ramos, E. (2005) Distribución ecológica actual de los reptiles de Guerrero: Un análisis Biogeográfico preliminar.
M.Sc. Thesis, Facultad de Ciencias, UNAM, Ciudad de México, 92 pp.
Pérez-Ramos, E., Saldaña de la Riva, L. & Uribe-Peña, Z. (2000) A checklist of the reptiles and amphibians of Guerrero,
México. Anales del Instituto de Biología, Serie Zoología, 71 (1), 21–40.
Pérez-Ramos, E. & Saldaña de la Riva, L. (2008) Morphological revision of lizards of the formosus group, genus Sceloporus
(Squamata: Sauria) of Southern Mexico, with description of a new species. Bulletin of the Maryland Herpetological
Society, 44 (3), 77–97
Reynoso, V.H., Paredes-León, R. & González-Hernández, A. (2011) Anfibios y reptiles de Chiapas con comentarios sobre los
reportes y estudios de diversidad herpetofaunística en la región, su endemismo y conservación. In: Álvarez Noguera, F.
(Ed.), Chiapas: Estudios sobre su diversidad biológica. Instituto de Biología. Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México,
México, D.F., pp. 459–509.
Sabaj-Pérez M.H. (Ed.) (2013) Standard symbolic codes for institutional resource collections in herpetology and ichthyology:
An Online Reference. Version 4.0 (28 June 2013). American Society of Ichthyologists and Herpetologists, Washington,
D.C. Available from: http://www.asih.org/ (accessed 20 December 2015)
Saldaña-de la Riva, L. & Pérez-Ramos, E. (1987) Herpetofauna del estado de Guerrero, México. B.Sc. Thesis, Facultad de
Ciencias, UNAM, México, 389 pp.
Sánchez, O. & López-Forment, W. (1987) Anfibios y reptiles de la región de Acapulco, Guerrero, México. Anales del Instituto
de Biología, Serie Zoológica, 58 (2), 735–750.
Savage, J.M. (1984) A new species of rain frog genus Eleutherodactylus (Leptodactylidae), from Guerrero, Mexico. Amphibia-
Reptilia, 5, 253–260.
Secretaría de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales (Semarnat) (2010) Norma Oficial Mexicana NOM-059-SEMARNAT-

10 · Zootaxa 4422 (1) © 2018 Magnolia Press PALACIOS-AGUILAR & FLORES-VILLELA

 2010, Protección ambiental-Especies nativas de México de flora y fauna silvestres-Categorías de riesgo y especificaciones
para su inclusión, exclusión o cambio-Lista de especies en riesgo. Diario Oficial de la Federación. 30 de diciembre de
2010, Segunda Sección. México, 77 pp.
Smith, H.M. (1939) The Mexican and Central American lizards of the genus Sceloporus. Field Museum of Natural History,
Zoological Series, 26, 1–397.
Smith, H.M. & Savitzky, A.H. (1972) Another cryptic associate of the lizard Sceloporus formosus in Guerrero, Mexico.
Journal of Herpetology, 8 (4), 297–303.
Smith, H.M. & Taylor, E.H. (1945) An annotated checklist and key to the snakes of Mexico. Bulletin of the United States
National Museum, 187, 1–239.
Smith, H.M. & Taylor, E.H. (1948) An annotated checklist and key to the Amphibia of Mexico. Bulletin of the United States
National Museum, 194, 1–118.
Smith, H.M. & Taylor, E.H. (1950a) Type localities of Mexican Reptiles and Amphibians. The University of Kansas Science
Bulletin, XXXIII, Pt. II.
Smith, H.M. & Taylor, E.H. (1950b) An annotated checklist and key to the reptiles of Mexico exclusive of the snakes. Bulletin
of the United States National Museum, 199, 1–253.
Smith, H.M. & Taylor, E.H. (1966) Herpetology of Mexico. Annotated checklists and keys to the amphibians and reptiles. Eric
Lundberg, Ashton, Maryland, 29 + 239 + 118 + 253 pp.
Snyder, D.H. (1972) Hyla juanitae, a new treefrog from southern Mexico, and its relationship to H. pinorum. Journal of
Herpetology, 6 (1), 5–15.
Taylor, E.H. & Smith, H.M. (1938) Miscellaneous Notes on Mexican Snakes. The University of Kansas Science Bulletin, XXV
(13), 239–258.
Webb, R.G. & Fugler, C.M. (1957) Selected comments on amphibians and reptiles from the Mexican State of Puebla.
Herpetologica, 13 (1), 33–36.
Wilson, L.D. & Campbell, J.A. (2000) A new species of the calamarina group of the colubrid snake genus Tantilla (Reptilia:
Squamata) from Guerrero, Mexico, with a review and a key to members of the group. Proceedings of the Biological
Society of Washington, 113 (3), 820–827.
Wilson, L.D., Johnson, J.D. & Mata-Silva, V. (2013a) A conservation reassessment of the amphibians of Mexico based on EVS
measure. Amphibian & Reptile Conservation, 7 (1), 97–127.
Wilson, L.D., Mata-Silva, V. & Johnson, J.D. (2013b) A conservation reassessment of the reptiles of Mexico based on EVS
measure. Amphibian & Reptile Conservation, 7 (1), 1–47.

HERPETOFAUNA OF GUERRERO, MÉXICO Zootaxa 4422 (1) © 2018 Magnolia Press · 11

 
$33(1',;/LVWRIVSHFLHV
$%%5(9,$7,2163& 
606  %' 



 709% 
 120 
 !"#$3U    7K %(Q &(96&' !() *  + ,'()* !
'()*  -% '() ,8&1 .  /    %  
'   * /& +
  * 17  % 98 (* (1
&*&5)&(&! 0 *0&!  *1 !*,17. 1;
*"/1
Taxa %LRJHRJUDSKLFSURYLQFHV (OHYDWLRQ (QGHPLVP 5LVNFDWHJRU\
UDQJHPDVO
 3& 606 %' 709%   120 ,8&1 (96
$03+,%,$RUGHUVIDPLOLHVJHQHUDVSHFLHV
$QXUDIDPLOLHVJHQHUDVSHFLHV
%XIRQLGDHJHQHUDVSHFLHV 
Incilius cycladen2+)%3!%*4$556 7 7   8#94"""   / 4:
Incilius gemmifer 2) *4$:"6 7 7   49;#"   &  4#
Incilius marmoreus2<!*4;886 7 7   "9$;"   + 44

12 · Zootaxa 4422 (1) © 2018 Magnolia Press

Incilius occidentalis2! *4;=$6  7 7 7 48""9>8""   + 44
Incilius perplexus 2) *4$:86  7 7  #""94:""   &  44
Rhinella horribilis2<!*4;886 7 7 7 7 "94=""   + 8
&HQWUROHQLGDHJHQXVVSHFLHV 
Hyalinobratrachium fleischmanni2 *4;$86 7 7   =5>94$:5   + 4"
&UDXJDVWRULGDHJHQXVVSHFLHV 
Craugastor augusti 2?
*4;=$6  7 7 7 :":9>$:#   + ;
Craugastor guerreroensis 2+)%*4$5=6  7   $;"945>" &   4;
Craugastor hobartsmithi2) *4$856  7  7 ;""9>"""   &  4#
Craugastor mexicanus 2 %*4;=$6  7  7 4>8"98:>"   + 45
Craugastor occidentalis 2) *4$:46 7 7 7  4""9>>""    48
Craugastor omiltemanus 20@%*4$""6  7   >>""9>5"" &  &  45
Craugastor pygmaeus 2) *4$856 7 7   >""9>>""   / $
Craugastor rugulosus 2 *4;5$6 7 7 7  4""9>#5"   + 48
Craugastor saltator2) *4$:46  7   4#""98:>" &   4#
Craugastor uno 2'*4$;:6  7   >"#"9>=:"   &  4=
(OHXWKHURGDFW\OLGDHJHQXVVSHFLHV 
Eleutherodactylus albolabris 2) *4$:86  7   =""94""" &   4=
Eleutherodactylus dilatus 2'
3 *4$##6  7   >4""9>8"" &  &  4=
Eleutherodactylus nitidus 2
*4;5$6  7 7 7 48""9>8""   + 4>
     ......continued on the next page

PALACIOS-AGUILAR & FLORES-VILLELA

 
$33(1',;2 6         
Taxa %LRJHRJUDSKLFSURYLQFHV (OHYDWLRQ (QGHPLVP 5LVNFDWHJRU\
UDQJHPDVO
 3& 606 %' 709%   120 ,8&1 (96
Eleutherodactylus pipilans 2) *4$:"6 7 7   4:"9>8#"   + 44
Eleutherodactylus syristes 2- )*4$5#6  7   $$:9>>"5   &  45
+\OLGDHJHQHUDVSHFLHV 
Charadrahyla tecuani !(*
-AB  7   4##> &   4#
3!%*>""$
Charadrahyla trux 2C3
*4$=>6  7   4=5"9>:4# & C  4:
Dendropsophus sartori 2!%*4$#46 7 7   "94"""  C + 4:

HERPETOFAUNA OF GUERRERO, MÉXICO

Diaglena spatulata 20@%*4;;>6 7  7  "98#"   + 48
Dryophytes arboricola 2) *4$:46  7   4=""9>""" &   4>
Dryophytes arenicolor *4;55  7 7 7 8""98"""   + =
Dryophytes eximius 2*4;#:6    7 >>""9>#""   + 4"
Exerodonta juanitae 2)*4$=>6  7   =#"94##"  C / 4:
Exerodonta melanomma 2) *4$:"6  7   =""9>"""  C / 44
Exerodonta pinorum 2) *4$8=6  7   =""94;>"   / 48
Exerodonta smaragdina 2) *4$:"6  7  7 4:#"9>5#"   + 4>
Exerodonta sumichrasti %*4;=$  7   >""945=#   + $
Ptychohyla erythromma 2) *4$8=6  7   =""9$;" &  &  48
Ptychohyla leonhardschultzei 2C%*4$8:6 7 7   #;"94$";   &  4>
Sarcohyla bistincta 2 *4;==6  7  7 4:""9>;""   + $
Sarcohyla chryses 2C*4$5#6  7   >8:"9>5"" &   4:
Sarcohyla mykter2C3
*4$=>6  7   4$;#9>#>" & C &  48
Sarcohyla pentheter 2C*4$5#6  7   48>"9>"""   &  48
Sarcohyla thorectes 2C*4$5#6  7   >#""    48
Scinax staufferi 2 *4;5#6 7  7  4"95""   + :
Smilisca baudini2!D3( *4;:46 7 7 7  "945#;   + 8
Tlalocohyla smithii 2 *4$">6 7 7 7  "945#;   + 44
Trachycephalus typhonius 2+
*4=#;6 7    #"9#""   + :
/HSWRGDFW\OLGDHJHQXVVSHFLHV 
Leptodactylus fragilis 2 %*4;==6 7 7   "94#8"   + #
Leptodactylus melanonotus 2- ,*4;5"6 7 7 7  "94##"   + 5

Zootaxa 4422 (1) © 2018 Magnolia Press ·

     ......continued on the next page

13
 
$33(1',;2 6         
Taxa %LRJHRJUDSKLFSURYLQFHV (OHYDWLRQ (QGHPLVP 5LVNFDWHJRU\
UDQJHPDVO
 3& 606 %' 709%   120± ,8&1 (96
0LFURK\OLGDHJHQXVVSHFLHV 
Hypopachus ustus 2 *4;556 7 7   #"94"""   + =
Hypopachus variolosus 2 *4;556 7 7 7  4"945""   + :
3K\OORPHGXVLGDHJHQXVVSHFLHV 
Agalychnis dacnicolor2 *4;5:6 7 7 7  "944""   + 48
Agalychnis moreleti 2!D*4;#86 7 7   $8$9>"#"    =
6FDSKLRSRGLGDHJHQXVVSHFLHV 
Spea multiplicata 2 *4;586  7 7  4"""9>455    5
5DQLGDHJHQXVVSHFLHV 

14 · Zootaxa 4422 (1) © 2018 Magnolia Press

Lithobates berlandieri 2*4;#:6 7 7   4"9>#$#   + =
Lithobates forreri2 *4;;86 7 7 7 7 4"94#""   + 8
Lithobates omiltemanus20@%*4$""6  7   >8""9>:"" &   48
Lithobates sierramadrensis2) *4$8$6  7   ;#"94"""   / 48
Lithobates zweifeli2-
*E
3<((*4$;86  7 7  8""94$""   + 44
Lithobates
1 !FCF-
*E
3<%*   7  44;=94>#" &   4#
4$;8
Lithobates
1 !F) F-
*E
3<%* 7    4#"9#;" &   4#
4$;8
5KLQRSKU\QLGDHJHQXVVSHFLHV 
Rhinophrynus dorsalis!D3( *4;:4 7 7   "9=""   + ;
&DXGDWDIDPLOLHVJHQHUDVSHFLHV
$PE\VWRPDWLGDHJHQXVVSHFLHV 
Ambystoma rivulare2) *4$:"6    7 >>""  C  48
3OHWKRGRQWLGDHJHQXVVVSHFLHV 
Aquiloeurycea cephalica2 *4;5#6    7 44""98"""  C  4:
Bolitoglossa hermosa

*<G3C*4$;8 7 7   ==#9>:5: &   45

Isthmura bellii 20)*4;#"6  7  7 4#""9>5""  C / 4>
Isthmura maxima2*0HH
3<G*  7   4"8"9>884    4=
>""#6
Pseudoeurycea ahuizotlC*4$$5  7   8>$5 &   4;
     ......continued on the next page

PALACIOS-AGUILAR & FLORES-VILLELA

 
$33(1',;2 6         
Taxa %LRJHRJUDSKLFSURYLQFHV (OHYDWLRQ (QGHPLVP 5LVNFDWHJRU\
UDQJHPDVO
 3& 606 %' 709%   120 ,8&1 (96
Pseudoeurycea amuzgaDB!
3I  7   45:#9>8"" &   4;
'*>""8
Pseudoeurycea kuautli !(* *
  7   4$4" &   4;
-AB3!%*>"48
Pseudoeurycea mixcoatlC*4$$5  7   >>""9>5"" &   4=
Pseudoeurycea tenchalli C*4$$5  7   >:5"9>#5" &  &  4=
Pseudoeurycea teotepecC*4$$5  7   8:># &  &  4;
Pseudoeurycea tlahcuiloh C*4$$5  7   >5559>$55 &   4=

HERPETOFAUNA OF GUERRERO, MÉXICO

Thorius grandis-G*<G3E!*4$$$  7   >:$#9885" &  &  4#
Thorius hankeni !(* *E 
3  7   >55"9>$8" &   4;
!%*>"4:
Thorius infernalis-G*<G3E!*4$$$  7   44:" &   4;
Thorius omiltemi-G*<G3E!*4$$$  7   >>""9>="" &  &  4;
*\PQRSKLRQDIDPLO\JHQXVVSHFLHV
&DHFLOLGDHJHQXVVSHFLHV
Dermophis oaxacae 2
*4$8"6 7 7   "94"""    4>
5(37,/,$RUGHUVIDPLOLHVJHQHUDVSHFLHV
&URFRG\OLDIDPLO\JHQXVVSHFLHV
&URFRG\OLGDHJHQXVVSHFLHV 
Crocodylus acutus2'*4;"=6 7  7  "94>"   / 4:
6TXDPDWDIDPLOLHVJHQHUDVSHFLHV
%LSHGLGDHJHQXVVSHFLHV  
Bipes canaliculatus +*4;"4 7  7  4#95""   + 4>
Bipes tridactylus ?
*4;$: 7    4"9=" &  + 4:
$QJXLGDHJHQHUDVSHFLHV 
Abronia deppii 2<!*4;>;6    7 4;#"9>5""  C &  45
Abronia martindelcampoi E 
3A%B-1*  7   >4""9>5"" &  &  4#
>""8
Abronia mixteca  3 *4$5=  7   >>#"  C / 4;
Barisia imbricata 2<!*4;>;6    7 >:"8   + 4:
Gerrhonotus liocephalus <!*4;>;  7 7 7 ;:"9>:#"   + 5
Mesaspis gadovii 2 *4$486  7   >>""9>=""   + 4:

Zootaxa 4422 (1) © 2018 Magnolia Press ·

     ......continued on the next page

15
 
$33(1',;2 6         
Taxa %LRJHRJUDSKLFSURYLQFHV (OHYDWLRQ (QGHPLVP 5LVNFDWHJRU\
UDQJHPDVO
 3& 606 %' 709%   120 ,8&1 (96
&RU\WRSKDQLGDHJHQXVVSHFLHV 
Basiliscus vittatus <!*4;>; 7 7   4"945""    =
'DFW\ORLGDHJHQXVVSHFLHV 
Anolis dunni !%*4$85 7 7   "94;""  C + 45
Anolis gadovii  *4$"#  7   >5"984" & C + 45
Anolis liogaster  *4$"#  7   4$$"9>:$8 &  + 4:
Anolis megapholidotus !%*4$88  7   $5"94=;" &  + 45
Anolis microlepidotus '
*4$#:  7   4>:#94;$$   + 4#
Anolis nebulosus 2<!*4;8:6 7 7 7 7 4"9>>""   + 48
Anolis nietoi JK%*0L!BM DB*
3  7   #;"944;# &   45

16 · Zootaxa 4422 (1) © 2018 Magnolia Press

DB+B*>"4:
Anolis omiltemanus '
*4$#:  7   4;$"9>:"" &  + 4#
Anolis quercorumE%*4$=;   7  4=>"   + 45
Anolis subocularis'
*4$#: 7 7   4"9$$8 &   4#
Anolis taylori !%3*4$:# 7    >#"988" &  + 45
(XEOHSKDULGDHJHQXVVSHFLHV 
Coleonyx elegans0)*4;:# 7 7 7  "94;""    $
*HNNRQLGDHJHQXVVSHFLHV 
Hemidactylus frenatus%*4;85 7 7 7  "94:"" .    
+HORGHUPDWLGDHJHQXVVSHFLHV 
Heloderma horridum 2<!*4;>$6 7 7 7  "94#""  C + 44
,JXDQLGDHJHQHUDVSHFLHV 
Ctenosaura clarki )*4$>; 7  7  >""9#4"  C / 4#
Ctenosaura pectinata 2<!*4;8:6 7 7 7 7 "945;;  C  4#
Iguana iguana +
*4=#; 7  7  "9;="    4>
0DEX\LGDHJHQXVVSHFLHV 
Marisora brachypoda 2) *4$#56 7 7 7  4"9>"""    5
3KU\QRVRPDWLGDHJHQHUDVSHFLHV 
Phrynosoma asio  *4;5:   7  :;;94454    44
Phrynosoma orbiculare 2+
*4=#;6  7   4"""9>#""  C + 4>
     ......continued on the next page

PALACIOS-AGUILAR & FLORES-VILLELA

 
$33(1',;2 6         
Taxa %LRJHRJUDSKLFSURYLQFHV (OHYDWLRQ (QGHPLVP 5LVNFDWHJRU\
UDQJHPDVO
 3& 606 %' 709%   120 ,8&1 (96
Phrynosoma sherbrookei   
*  7 7  45==9>":" &   4#
C
  *AA%B3+%D*>"4:
Phrynosoma taurus ?
*4;=8  7 7  4"""94=""  C + 4>
Sceloporus adleri !%3'BG)*4$=:  7   4#""98""" &  + 4#
Sceloporus aeneus <!*4;>;  7   4;#"985""   + 48
Sceloporus asper  *4;$=  N   8""945""   + 4:
Sceloporus druckercolini DB!
3I  7   ;;=9>5"" &   4:
+'*>"";

HERPETOFAUNA OF GUERRERO, MÉXICO

Sceloporus gadoviae  *4$"#   7  :;"94:48   + 44
Sceloporus grammicus <!*4;>;  7   4>="9>=>"   + $
Sceloporus horridus <!*4;8: 7 7 7 7 "9>8""   + 44
Sceloporus melanorhinus   *4;=5 7 7 7 7 "94;#"   + $
Sceloporus ochoterenae !%*4$8:  7 7 7 4";$94;#"   + 4>
Sceloporus omiltemanus 0@%*4;$"  7   4;""9>=8"   + 48
Sceloporus palaciosi +0L *4$;8    7 >:;"9>#5"   + 4#
Sceloporus pyrocephalus  *4;5: 7  7  4"9:=#   + 4>
Sceloporus scitulus !%*4$:>  7   4;#"98:#" &  + 4#
Sceloporus siniferus  *4;5$ 7 7   "94;""   + 44
Sceloporus spinosus<!*4;>;  7   4>8"94="=   + 4>
Sceloporus stejnegeri !%*4$:> 7    4""95"" &  + 48
Sceloporus torquatus <!*4;>;    7 4;""9>:""   + 44
Sceloporus utiformis  *4;5: 7 7 7  "94==#   + 4#
Urosaurus bicarinatus 2!D*4;#56 7 7 7 7 "94=5;   + 4>
Urosaurus gadovi 2%!*4$>46   7  4="9:>"   + 4>
3K\OORGDFW\OLGDHJHQXVVSHFLHV 
Phyllodactylus bordai ) *4$:>  7 7 7 :;=94$""   + 48
Phyllodactylus delcampoi 
*4$85 7    >:=95"" & C + 45
Phyllodactylus lanei !%*4$8# 7 7   >>944:"   + 4#
Phyllodactylus papenfussi %)*  3 DB   7  #$: &   45
+B*>""$
Phyllodactylus tuberculosus <!*4;8: 7 7   "94:4:    ;

Zootaxa 4422 (1) © 2018 Magnolia Press ·

      ......continued on the next page

17
 
$33(1',;2 6         
Taxa %LRJHRJUDSKLFSURYLQFHV (OHYDWLRQ (QGHPLVP 5LVNFDWHJRU\
UDQJHPDVO
 3& 606 %' 709%   120 ,8&1 (96
6FLQFLGDHJHQHUDVSHFLHV 
Mesoscincus altamirani 2?
*4;;=4;$"O4;$4P6  7 7  >4#948=4    4:
Plestiodon brevirostris 20@%*4;5"6  7   4#""9>#""   + 44
Plestiodon indubitus 2) *4$886    7 4=""9>8#"    4#
Plestiodon lotus 'LABQB*   
   7  4"=:94=="    45
* B-AB* CA*
B3R!DBC
*>"4=
Plestiodon nietoi EB30HABQB*>"4>  7   4;849>>#$ &   4=
Plestiodon ochoterenai 2) *4$886  7   =$"948""   + 48
Scincella assatus 2 *4;5:6 7 7   4=94;""    =

18 · Zootaxa 4422 (1) © 2018 Magnolia Press

7HLLGDHJHQHUDVSHFLHV 
Aspidoscelis calidipes 2!*4$##6   7  5#"   + 4:
Aspidoscelis communis 2 *4;==6 7  7  >"94""   + 4:
Aspidoscelis costata 2 *4;==6  7 7  >>#94#;#   + 44
Aspidoscelis deppii 2<!*4;8:6 7 7 7  4948#"   + ;
Aspidoscelis guttata 2<!*4;8:6 7 7 7  "94;""   + 4>
Aspidoscelis lineatissima 2 *4;=;6 7 7   5"94#"   + 4:
Aspidoscelis sackii <!*4;8:  7 7  #8"945""   + 4:
Holcosus undulatus 2<!*4;8:6 7 7   49>"""    =
;DQWXVLLGDHJHQXVVSHFLHV 
Lepidophyma smithii  *4;=5 7    "9>>"    ;
Lepidophyma tarascae B)*<((3S'B*4$;> 7    4"9>8:  C  4:
;HQRVDXULGDHJHQXVVSHFLHV 
Xenosaurus penai DB!
*I'3  7   4"#"94=8# &  + 45
!(*>"""
%RLGDHJHQXVVSHFLHV 
Boa imperator *4;"8 7 7 7  "948""  C  48
&ROXEULGDHJHQHUDVSHFLHV 
Coluber mentovarius 2!D*( 3!D* 7 7 7 7 "9>4="    5
4;#:6
Conopsis acuta2 *4;;56  7   >884    4:
      ......continued on the next page

PALACIOS-AGUILAR & FLORES-VILLELA

 
$33(1',;2 6         
Taxa %LRJHRJUDSKLFSURYLQFHV (OHYDWLRQ (QGHPLVP 5LVNFDWHJRU\
UDQJHPDVO
 3& 606 %' 709%   120 ,8&1 (96
Conopsis biserialis2) 3!%*4$:>6    7 4##"9>;""    48
Conopsis megalodon 2) 3!%*4$:>6  7   >>""98"#"    4:
Drymarchon melanurus 2!D* (  3 !?* 7 7 7 7 "94$""   + 5
4;#:6
Drymobius chloroticus2 *4;;56  7   >"""   + ;
Drymobius margaritiferus 2%*4;8=6 7 7 7  494:#"    5
Ficimia publia  *4;55  7 7  4"""945>"    $

HERPETOFAUNA OF GUERRERO, MÉXICO

Ficimia ruspator !%3) *4$:4  7   48"" &   45
Lampropeltis abnorma2  *4;;56 7 7 7 7 49>#""    =
Lampropeltis polyzona *4;5" 7 7 7 7 49>#""    =
Leptophis diplotropis20@%*4;=>6 7 7 7 7 "9>#=#  C  4:
Leptophis mexicanus 2!D* (L 3 !D*  7   4=>"  C + 5
4;#:6
Mastigodryas melanolomus2 *4;5;6 7 7   494$""    5
Oxybelis aeneus 2<*4;>:6 7 7 7  494$4#    #
Oxybelis fulgidus 2*4;"86 7    >>"9$""    $
Pituophis lineaticollis 2 *4;546  7  7 >8""9>#""    ;
Pseudoficimia frontalis2 *4;5:6 7 7 7  4944""    48
Salvadora bairdi R*4;5" 7 7  7 4"""98>""   + 4#
Salvadora intermedia -,*4$:"  7   #""9>=""   + 45
Salvadora lemniscata 2 *4;$#6 7    #"94>""   + 4#
Salvadora mexicana 2!?* (  3 !?* 7 7 7  494>""   + 4#
4;#:6
Senticolis triaspis 2 *4;556 7 7 7  "9>:>#    5
Sonora michoacanensis 2?
*4;;:6  7 7  4>4>9485:   + 4:
Stenorrhina freminvilli 2!D* (  3 !?* 7 7   "9>>""    =
4;#:6
Tantilla bocourti 20@%*4;$#6 7 7 7  ;#"94;>:   + $
Tantilla calamarina *4;55 7 7 7 7 8""945==   + 4>
Tantilla coronadoi -,*4$::  7   4:">94#>: &  + 4#
Tantilla deppei2  *4;;86    7 4#>:9>:8;  C + 48

Zootaxa 4422 (1) © 2018 Magnolia Press ·

      ......continued on the next page

19
 
$33(1',;2 6         
Taxa %LRJHRJUDSKLFSURYLQFHV (OHYDWLRQ (QGHPLVP 5LVNFDWHJRU\
UDQJHPDVO
 3& 606 %' 709%   120 ,8&1 (96
Tantilla rubra  *4;=#24;=56  7   49>54;   + #
Tantilla sertula <
3!(*>""" 7    4#"9>>"    45
Trimorphodon biscutatus 2!D*( 3!?* 7 7 7  "94#""    =
4;#:6
Trimorphodon tau2 *4;="6  7 7 7 4""9>5""   + 48
'LSVDGLGDHJHQHUDVSHFLHV 
Coniophanes fissidens 20@%*4;#;6 7 7   494"5>    =
Coniophanes imperialis 230*4;#$6 7    >$"   + ;
Coniophanes lateritius  *4;5>  7   4594#$"    48
Coniophanes melanocephalus2
*4;5$O4;="P6   7  44""94#:>    4:

20 · Zootaxa 4422 (1) © 2018 Magnolia Press

Coniophanes michoacanensis E 
 3 !%* 7    4$9;""    4=
>""$
Coniophanes taylori -*4$#4 7 7   >""9$4#    45
Dipsas gaigeae 2'*4$8=6 7    :=   + 4=
Enulius flavitorques 2 *4;5;6 7 7 7  4948""    #
Geophis occabus'LABQB*0HABQB*  7   4=;=94=$8 &   45

-AB3   
*>"44
Geophis omiltemanus 0@%*4;$8  7   >8""9>:""   + 4#
Geophis petersii  *4;$:   7  4="#    4#
Geophis sieboldi2R*4;5>6  7   >";89>8="    48
Hypsiglena torquata 20@%*4;5"6 7  7  494#""   + ;
Imantodes cenchoa +
*4=#; 7    =44    5
Imantodes gemmistratus *4;5$24;546 7 7 7  494$;"    5
Leptodeira maculata 2- ,*4;5"O4;54P6 7 7 7  "9>"""   + =
Leptodeira nigrofasciata 0@%*4;5; 7    4948""   + ;
Leptodeira polysticta20@%*4;;#6  7   ;:89>"""    ;
Leptodeira splendida 0@%*4;$# 7  7 7 "94=""   + 4:
Leptodeira uribei 2!HB
3!%*4$$>6 7    4;"   + 4=
Pseudoleptodeira latisfasciata 20@%*4;$:6 7 7 7  4"94#""   + 4:
Rhadinaea hesperia )*4$:"  7  7 ;;:94$;>   + 4"
Rhadinaea myersi 

!*4$5#  7   4:#"9>884    4>

      ......continued on the next page

PALACIOS-AGUILAR & FLORES-VILLELA

 
$33(1',;2 6         
Taxa %LRJHRJUDSKLFSURYLQFHV (OHYDWLRQ (QGHPLVP 5LVNFDWHJRU\
UDQJHPDVO
 3& 606 %' 709%   120 ,8&1 (96
Rhadinaea omiltemana20@%*4;$:6  7   >>>59>:8$ &   4#
Rhadinaea taeniata 2
*4;586  7 7 7 4#>:9>;8#   + 48
Rhadinella dysmica ! *A'0'HB*E 
  7   :8> &   45
3!(*>"45
Rhadinophanes monticola )
3!(*4$;4  7   >#""9>=#" &   4#
Sibon nebulatus 2+
*4=#;6 7 7   "94>""    #
Tropidodipsas annulifera  *4;$: 7 7 7  494$"$   + 48

HERPETOFAUNA OF GUERRERO, MÉXICO

Tropidodipsas fasciata 0@%*4;$# 7 7   "9>48"    48
Tropidodipsas zweifeli 2+3<
*4$="6  7   4">494;""    45
(ODSLGDHJHQHUDVSHFLHV 
Hydrophis platurus2+
*4=556 7    e N + -
Micrurus browni %!3!%*4$:8 7 7   "9>"""   + ;
Micrurus distans J *4;54 7  7  "94#"#   + 4:
Micrurus laticollaris 
*4;="   7  8""945:"   + 4:
/HSWRW\SKORSLGDHJHQHUDVSHFLHV 
Epictia bakeweli '*4$8= 7 7   494$#"    8
Epictia phenops 2 *4;=#6 7    :"945="    8
Epictia schneideri <%*>"45  7   ;>#945=#    4>
Rena maxima 2+ '*4$8>6  7 7 7 4>>"94;>$   + 44
/R[RFHPLGDHJHQXVVSHFLHV 
Loxocemus bicolor  *4;54 7 7 7  494>""    4"
1DWULFLGDHJHQHUDVSHFLHV 
Storeria storerioides 2 *4;5#6  7  7 4##"9>;""   + 44
Thamnophis chrysocephalus2 *4;;:6  7   4>4$98"=;   + 4:
Thamnophis cyrtopsis 2J *4;5"6 7 7  7 49>=""   + =
Thamnophis eques 2

*4;8:6  7   #89>#$"   + ;

Thamnophis godmani 20@%*4;$:6  7   4=5;98"4;   + 4:
Thamnophis proximus 2) &1R!
*4;>86 7    49>>"    =
Thamnophis validus 2J *4;5"6 7    "94>""   + 4>

Zootaxa 4422 (1) © 2018 Magnolia Press ·

     ......continued on the next page

21
 
$33(1',;2 6         
Taxa %LRJHRJUDSKLFSURYLQFHV (OHYDWLRQ (QGHPLVP 5LVNFDWHJRU\
UDQJHPDVO
 3& 606 %' 709%   120 ,8&1 (96
7\SKORSLGDHJHQXVVSHFLHV 
Indotyphlops braminus 2*4;"86 7 7 7  494#"" .    
9LSHULGDHJHQHUDVSHFLHVVXEVSHFLHV 
Agkistrodon bilineatus 0@%*4;58 7 7 7  "94#""    44
Crotalus culminatus J(*4$#> 7 7 7 7 #"945""    4#
Crotalus ericsmithi!(3E 
*>"";  7   4"8= &   4;
Crotalus intermedius omiltemanus0@%*4;$#  7   >"=898""" & C + 4#
Crotalus tlaloci )
* +G!*  
* +% *    7 >>""9>#>"   + 45
R 
*C' HB*0@,3%)*>"4:
Crotalus ravus *4;5#    7 >8#"  C + 4:

22 · Zootaxa 4422 (1) © 2018 Magnolia Press

Crotalus ravus exiguus 2!(3C!
 *4$=$6  7   >8""984$> & C + 4:
Mixcoatlus barbouri2*4$4$6  7   >8$"9>5"; &  &  4#
Mixcoatlus browni 2%'*4$8;6  7   >8$"98>$5 &  &  4=
Ophryacus undulatus2R*4;#$6  7   4;""9>#"4   / 4#
Porthidium hespere 2!(*4$=56 7    >##    4;
;HQRGRQWLGDHJHQHUDVSHFLHV 
Clelia scytalina 2 *4;5=6 N 7   ;""    48
Conophis vittatus
*4;5" 7 7 7  "9>"""    44
Manolepis putnami2R*4;586 7 7   "94"""   + 48
Xenodon rabdocephalus 2< ,*4;>:6 N 7   "94;""    48
7HVWXGLQHVIDPLOLHVJHQHUDVSHFLHV
&KHORQLLGDHJHQHUDVSHFLHV 
Chelonia mydas 2+
*4=#;6 7    e   &  
Eretmochelys imbricata 2+
*4=556 7    e    
Lepidochelys olivacea2&
%
% B*4;>$6 7    e   / 
'HUPRFKHO\LGDHJHQXVVSHFLHV 
Dermochelys coriacea 2*4=546 7    e    
(P\GLGDHJHQXVVSHFLHV 
Trachemys ornata 20)*4;846 7    "94#"   / 4$
     ......continued on the next page

PALACIOS-AGUILAR & FLORES-VILLELA

 
$33(1',;2 6         
Taxa %LRJHRJUDSKLFSURYLQFHV (OHYDWLRQ (QGHPLVP 5LVNFDWHJRU\
UDQJHPDVO
 3& 606 %' 709%   120 ,8&1 (96
*HRHP\GLGDHJHQXVVSHFLHV         
Rhinoclemmys pulcherrima 20)*4;##6 7    4944""  C  ;
Rhinoclemmys rubida 2 *4;="6 7  7  494>8"    4:

HERPETOFAUNA OF GUERRERO, MÉXICO

.LQRVWHUQLGDHJHQXVVSHFLHV 
Kinosternon integrum+ *4;#: 7 7 7  "9>4""   + 44
Kinosternon oaxacae )3.'
*4$;" 7    4="    4#
7ULRQ\FKLGDHJHQXVVSHFLHV 
Apalone spinifera 2+*4;>=6   7  :;"95;> .   + 4#

Zootaxa 4422 (1) © 2018 Magnolia Press ·

23
 APPENDIX 2. New records reported from this study.

Squamata
Dactyloidae
Anolis quercorum: Olinalá, Xixila, 1720 m a.s.l. (MZFC 26445).
Colubridae
Leptophis mexicanus: Municipality of Tixtla de Guerrero, Amula (=Almolonga), 1720 m a.s.l. (BMNH 1894.1.17.5).
Tantilla rubra: 11.3 mi (18.1 km) NE Atoyac on the road to Puerto del Gallo, Sierra Madre del Sur (MVZ 17193).
This specimen was previously reported by Wilson and Mata-Silva (2014. Mesoamerican Herpetology 1: 5-95). However, they
state that they did not examined the specimen. The report of this species in their monograph is unclear, as they apparently
include this and an additional record not mentioned in text in the SE of the state on the map (page 56), but exclude both
from their final discussion. In a later study, the same authors (Wilson & Mata-Silva. 2015. Mesoamerican Herpetology 2:
418-498) omit the records and mention that the distribution of the species on the Pacific versant is restricted to Oaxaca.
The specimen was revised by us based on digital photographs made available by the associate curators of the institution where
it was deposited. Since there is no evidence that helps elucidate why the species was omitted from the aforementioned
works, we consider this to be the first verified record of the species in Guerrero.
Dipsadidae
Coniophanes imperialis: Acapulco de Juárez, La Poza, Viveros de Huayacán, 290 m a.s.l. (CNAR 17894).
Coniophanes lateritius: Chilpancingo de los Bravo, Ejido Zoyatepec, Cerro La Imagen (MZFC 31980); Zihuatanejo de
Azueta, near the San Antonio-Ciudad Altamirano highway (MZFC 32626).
Dipsas gaigeae: Zihuatanejo de Azueta, Between Vallecitos and Highway 200, on Hwy 134 (MZFC 26995).
Imantodes cenchoa: Carretera Río Santiago-San Vicente, 711 m a.s.l. (UTA R-58924).

24 · Zootaxa 4422 (1) © 2018 Magnolia Press PALACIOS-AGUILAR & FLORES-VILLELA

View publication stats