lawrence l. c. jones - tucson herpetological society · pdf filephotographic field guide to...

SONORAN HERPETOLOGIST 30 (3) 2017 49

Volume 25 Number 1January 2012

F U T U R E S P E A K E R S

50 18 October—Jim Rorabaugh: Saga of the Endangered Sonora Tiger Salamander

51 15 November—Roger Repp: The First 30 Years: It Doesn’t Get Any Better Than This

A R T I C L E S A N D N O T E S

52 “Reproduction in the Rough Earth Snake, Haldea striatula (Serpentes, Colubridae) from Oklahoma” by Stephen R. Goldberg

55 “Life and Death in the Regal Horned Lizard (Phrynosoma solare) in central Arizona” by B. K. Sullivan and E. A. Sullivan

59 “Chiggers (still) infesting Yarrow’s Spiny Lizard, Sceloporus jarrovii, in the Chiricahua Mountains, Arizona” by Brian R. Blais, Corey Shaw, Brandon Mayer, and Colin W. Brocka

B O O K R E V I E W

61 “Wildlife of Ecuador: A Photographic Field Guide to Birds, Mammals, Reptiles, and Amphibians” by Howard Clark, Jr.

Tucson Herpetological Society meetings are open to the public and are held on the third Wednesday of

each month starting at 7:15 PM

Number 3September 2017Volume 30

Lawrence L. C. Jones

Venomous Animals of the American Southwest: Beyond Snakes and Gilas

7:15 PM; Wednesday, 20 September 2017

Tucson City Council Ward 3, 1510 East Grant Road, Tucson, AZ 85719

Lawrence L. C. Jones hails from southern California. He received his B.S. and M.S. in biology and zoology from California State University at Long Beach. As a larval human, he was a Desert Rat × Beach Bum hybrid. Larry’s career in biology began when he was in his mother’s womb, and he went on to study invertebrates, fishes, amphibians, reptiles, mammals…and even birds! His early professional career included working in the marine environment, where he was a marine aquarist and biologist, but then he segued into strictly terrestrial fauna. He was help cap-tive by a dome of rain in the Pacific North-west for about twenty years before he had a midlife crisis and broke free to southeastern Arizona. He worked as a wildlife biologist for both research and management branches of mostly federal agencies for about 35 years and then retired to become a real biologist again. Larry resides in Tucson, where he studies lizards and scorpions, and writes the odd book. Larry has co-authored/edited four books on reptiles and amphibians, two on amphibians of the Pacific Northwest, one on lizards in the American Southwest, and one on habitat management in the Southwest. He has also authored about 100 publications on herps and other topics of biology. He is currently assisting on an Arizona herp book, and working on a new tome, “Venomous Animals of the American Southwest.”

Larry Jones with Sonoran Spiny-tailed Iguana (Ctenosaura hemilopha macrolopha).

Photo by Mike Sredl.

Throughout his career he has been fascinated by all creatures venomous, and retirement gave him time to follow up on this passion and synthesize information into this book.

This presentation basically follows the format of the book on venomous animals (currently in review with the publisher). While Arizona is among the most taxa-rich areas for venomous terrestrial animals in the U.S., it currently has no marine environment, although the Pacific Ocean and Gulf of California are but a hop, skip, and a smurf away. The geographic scope ranges from

ISSN 2333-8075

T H I S M O N T H ’ S P R O G R A M


California and Hawaii to Texas, and includes all waters and terra firma across the region. His approach to presenting the various taxa is by grouping them into four categories: vertebrates vs. invertebrates of land vs. sea (and freshwater). The presentation will target examples of these interesting creatures. Some of the awesome invertebrates of the aquatic realm include cnidarians, mollusks, worms, and bugs. Aquatic vertebrates include a vast array of cartilaginous and bony fishes, and a seasnake. On land, a plethora of arthropods is venomous, ranging from scorpions and centipedes to wasps, assassin bugs, and some caterpil-lars. Venomous terrestrial vertebrates are well-known and represented by reptiles and a couple shrews, but

the rattlesnakes are certainly the most familiar and noteworthy. Larry will also discuss what it is like to be envenomated by them, based on novel case reports of human envenomation (generally bites and stings by venomous fauna) solicited for the book. Human envenomation is of huge socioeconomic concern in the Southwest, although our area pales in comparison to many other regions of the world. There are two kinds of people in this world: those that are somewhat cavalier about being envenomated and those that avoid it like the plague. A classification system of envenomation causes will be introduced to account for why people are bitten or stung. Also, for the latter, prevention methods will be addressed.

Jim Rorabaugh

Saga of the Endangered Sonora Tiger Salamander

7:15 PM; Wednesday, 18 October 2017


Jim Rorabaugh received a B.S. in Zoology and M.S. in Animal Ecology from the University of California at Davis and went on to work as a wildlife biologist for various U.S. federal agencies, including 20 years in endangered species conservation for the Fish and Wildlife Service in Arizona and California. Now retired, he has authored numerous papers, book chapters, and other publications on amphibians and reptiles of the Southwestern U.S. and Sonora.

The Sonora Tiger Salamander (Ambystoma mavortium stebbinsi) is the only amphibian or reptile in Arizona listed under the Endangered Species Act as endan-gered. Its distribution is limited to the grasslands and

savannas of the San Rafael Valley, Arizona, adjacent valleys in Sonora, and lower canyons of adjoining mountains. Historically it probably bred in cienegas, but those habitats have been destroyed or are now inhabited by non-native predators with which the salamander cannot coexist. Today, the Sonora Tiger Salamander breeds primarily in cattle tanks. Key threats include habitat loss, non-native predators, a virulent iridovirus, and genetic swamping from introduced Barred Tiger Salamanders (Ambystoma mavortium mavortium). The talk will cover the ecology, current management, and conservation status of the Sonora Tiger Salamander in Arizona and Sonora.

Jim Rorabaugh with a Neotropical Vinesnake (Oxybelis aeneus), southern Arizona. Photo

courtesy Jim Rorabaugh.

The Sonora Ti-ger Salamander (Ambystoma mavortium stebbinsi) is the only amphib-ian or reptile in Arizona listed under the Endangered Species Act as endangered.


In the early 1990s, Roger spearheaded the formation of the Speaker’s Bureau, which was the educa-tional outreach program for the THS. His efforts to organize this worthwhile en-deavor earned him the Jar-chow Conserva-tion Award in 1994.

Roger A. Repp

The First 30 Years: It Doesn’t Get Any Better Than This

7:15 PM; Wednesday, 15 November 2017


Roger Repp arrived in Tucson in May of 1981, and began earnestly trying to find people who shared his herpetological interests. Though his searching took him to all the right places, nobody was really interested in taking on any newcomers with the local herpeto-logical scene. It was not until the formation of the Tucson Herpetological Society (THS) in 1988 that he began making friends who shared his passion. In the early 1990s, Roger spearheaded the formation of the Speaker’s Bureau, which was the educational outreach program for the THS. His efforts to organize this worthwhile endeavor earned him the Jarchow Con-servation Award in 1994. Since that time, he served the THS as president for five years, vice president for two years, treasurer for three years, and as a director for too many years to count. He assisted with three Current Research of the Herpetofauna of the Sonoran Desert Symposia (CRHSD2-4); has either led or assisted with nine Jarchow Conservation Awards; has presented over a hundred times on a wide variety of herpetological topics; and has authored or coauthored

twenty peer review papers as well as over a hundred popular articles. He also participated in a 15 year radio telemetry study on five species of venomous reptiles in a remote mountain range north of Tucson. During that time period, he taught over 500 students from over ten different universities the art of radio tracking. How many of you remember RAGE (Route! Advance! Gain! Encircle!)? He is currently enjoying a long hiatus from all duties of the THS, herping for the love of it, and writing a monthly column for the Bulletin of the Chicago Herpetological Society.

There is a famous beer commercial that centers on a bunch of fishing buddies gathered around the camp fire at the end of a spectacular day. At the end of it all, one guy raises his beer and says “It doesn’t get any better than this.” Roger lives for days like this, and his presentation will focus on the best of the best of times since the inception of the THS. Life began for him at the same time as the society, and this presentation will focus on how much the knowledge of the local herpetofauna has increased as a result of the THS.

Route! Advance! Gain! Encircle! Roger Repp (left front) demonstrates the basics of radio telemetry to the University of Arizona Herpetology class. Photo by Kevin E. Bonine.


Haldea stria-tula (Linnaeus, 1776) (sensu McVay and Carstens 2013) (Figure 1) is distributed primarily in the southeastern United States and is known from Alabama, Florida, Geor-gia, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia but also occurs in parts of Ar-kansas, Kan-sas, Missouri, Oklahoma, and Texas.

Haldea striatula (Linnaeus, 1776) (sensu McVay and Carstens 2013) (Figure 1) is distributed primarily in the southeastern United States and is known from Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mis-sissippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia but also occurs in parts of Arkan-sas, Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, and Texas (Wallach et al. 2014). In Oklahoma, it is found under protective cover in woodlands and suburban areas (Sievert and Sievert 2011). The biology of Hal-dea is summarized in Rossman and Wallach (1991); that of H. striatula is in Powell et al. (1994). Haldea striatula is viviparous (Wright and Wright 1957). Previous information on H. striatula reproduction in Oklahoma is from Carpen-ter (1958) who reported three embryos from June and six neonates each from June and August; Webb (1970) reported seven embryos in a H. striatula from July (Bryan County) and a litter of six from August (Mar-shall County); and a mean of 6.7 ± 0.2 SE (4-10; n = 33) for H. striatula from (Stewart 1989). In this paper I present data on the reproductive cycle of H. striatula from Oklahoma utilizing a histological examination of museum specimens. Use of museum specimens for obtaining reproductive data avoids removing addition-al animals from the wild.

A sample of 46 H. striatula from Oklahoma collect-ed 1943 to 2016 and deposited in the Sam Noble Mu-seum (OMNH), University of Oklahoma, Norman, Oklahoma, USA (Appendix) was examined. It consist-ed of 26 adult males (mean SVL = 167.9 mm ± 11.9 SD, range = 138-187 mm), 19 adult females (mean SVL = 190.6 mm ± 27.6 SD, range = 146-226 mm) and one unsexed subadult (SVL = 120 mm).

The left ovary was removed from females and the left testis and vas deferens (when possible), were re-moved from males for histological examination. Not all tissues were available for examination due to dam-ages in preservation or loss in histology slide prepa-ration. Tissues were embedded in paraffin, cut into 5 µm sections, mounted on glass slides and stained with Harris’ hematoxylin followed by eosin counterstain (Presnell and Schreibman 1997). Slides were exam-ined to determine the stage of the testicular cycle or the presence of yolk deposition. Oviductal eggs were

counted but were not histologically examined. No em-bryos were found. Histology slides were deposited in OMNH. An unpaired t-test was used to test for differ-ences between adult male and female mean SVLs (In-stat, vers. 3.0b, Graphpad Software, San Diego, CA).

Testicular histology of H. striatula was similar to that reported by Goldberg and Parker (1975) for the colubrid snakes, Masticophis taeniatus and Pituophis catenifer (as Pituophis melanoleucus). Monthly stages in the testicular cycle are in Table 1. Three stages were present: (1) Regressed, seminiferous tubules contained spermatogonia and Sertoli cells; (2) Recrudescence, an increase in cellularity was evidenced by increasing numbers of spermatogonia and the appearance of primary spermatocytes. In late recrudescence, second-ary spermatocytes and spermatids appeared just prior to the next period of sperm formation; (3) Spermio-genesis, lumina of the seminiferous tubules were lined by sperm or clusters of metamorphosing spermatids. Three males undergoing spermiogenesis were found, one each from June, July, and September (Table 1). The smallest reproductively mature male measured 138 mm SVL (OMNH 39278) (spermiogenesis) and was collected in September. All thirteen histologi-cally examined vasa deferentia: March (n = 5), April (n = 5), May (n = 2), June (n = 1) contained sperm indicating H. striatula may breed in the spring utiliz-ing sperm produced the previous autumn. This is in accordance with Clark (1964) who reported a spring mating period for H. striatula in Texas. However, Ten-nant (1984) reported both spring and autumn mating

Reproduction in the Rough Earth Snake, Haldea striatula (Serpentes, Colubridae) from OklahomaStephen R. Goldberg, Whittier College, Department of Biology, Whittier, CA; [email protected]

R E S E A R C H A R T I C L E

Figure 1. Rough Earth Snake (Haldea striatula) from Atascosa Co., Texas. Photo © Tom Lott, Associate Editor, SWCHR Bulletin.


for H. striatula in Texas. My finding of two June males, one undergoing early spermiogenesis (OMNH 29594), another in late recrudescence (on the verge of starting spermiogenesis) with metamorphosing spermatids, but no sperm (OMNH 42977) and one July male in early spermiogenesis (OMNH 40471), raises the possibility that some H. striatula matings may occur in spring-summer concomitant with sperm production. Howev-er, this is speculative, in view of my small sample sizes from these two months.

The mean SVL of adult female H. striatula was significantly larger than that of males (t = 3.7, df = 43, P = 0.0005). Monthly stages in the ovarian cycle are in Table 2. Three stages were present: (1) Quiescent = no yolk deposition; (2) Early yolk deposition (basophilic yolk granules in the ooplasm); (3) Oviductal eggs. No females with embryos were found in my sample. The smallest reproductively active female measured 148 mm SVL (OMNH 24080), contained five oviductal eggs and was collected in June. One slightly smaller female (SVL =146 mm, OMNH 42975) was arbitrarily considered to be an adult. Two females with oviduc-tal eggs (both from June) were found, two eggs in OMNH 29364 (SVL = 177 mm), and five in OMNH 24080 (SVL = 148 mm). This is within ranges of Fitch (1985) who reported litters of 2-7 for northern popu-lations (North Carolina, Missouri, Oklahoma) versus 2-9 for a southern (Texas) population of H. striatula. Other litter sizes are in Table 3. I limited information in Table 3 to data, in my opinion, actually taken from snakes, and not simply repeated between various field guides. No traces of placentae were found as reported for H. striatula by Stewart (1989, 1990). Blem and Blem (1985) reported H. striatula females likely reproduce annually; however the presence (Table 2) of 6/15 (40 %) April-June females with quiescent ovaries suggests only a portion of the female population in Oklahoma produces young in a given year.

In summary, the presence of H. striatula males with regressed testes from spring and concomitant sperm in the vasa deferentia, plus one September male under-going spermiogenesis (Table 1) suggests an aestival spermatogenesis (sensu Saint Girons 1982) is followed. However the occurrence of one June and one July H. striatula males undergoing early spermiogenesis and a second June male in very late recrudescence (sper-matids) indicates some spring-summer breeding may occur. Examination of additional testes from June-July H. striatula males are needed to determine whether this actually occurs.

Acknowledgments—I thank Cameron D. Siler (OMNH) for permission to examine H. striatula and Jessa L. Watters (OMNH) for facilitating the loan.

Literature Cited

Anderson, P. 1965. The Reptiles of Missouri. Univer-sity of Columbia Press, Columbia.

Blem, C.R., and L.B. Blem. 1985. Notes on Virginia (Reptilia: Colubridae) in Virginia. Brimleyana 11:87-95.

Brown, E.E. 1992. Notes on amphibians and reptiles of the western Piedmont of North Carolina. Jour-nal of the Elisha Mitchell Scientific Society 108:38-54.

Carpenter, C.C. 1958. Reproduction, young, eggs and food of Oklahoma snakes. Herpetologica 14:113-115.

Clark, Jr., D.R. 1964. Reproduction and sexual dimor-phism in a population of the rough earth snake, Virginia striatula (Linnaeus). Texas Journal of Sci-ence 16:265-295.

Month n Regressed Recrudescence Spermiogenesis

March 6 6 0 0

April 10 5 5 0

May 3 2 1 0

June 3 0 2* 1

July 3 0 2 1

Sept 1 0 0 1

Month n Quiescent Yolk Deposition Oviductal Eggs*

March 2 2 0 0

April 6 1 5 0

May 2 2 0 0

June 7 3 2 2

Sept 1 1 0 0

Oct 1 1 0 0

State Source Litter sizes, Month

Arkansas Trauth et al. 1994 7.1* ± 0.3 (3–10; n = 30)**

Missouri Anderson 1965 3, August

North Carolina Palmer and Braswell 1995

3-11, June to August

North Carolina Brown 1992 5.5*, 2–13**

Texas Guidry 1953 3, 4, 5

Texas Sabath and Worthing-ton 1959

2, 4, 5, July–August

Texas Clark 1964 4.94*, 3–8, July to September***

Texas Ford et al. 1990 4.5* (n = 2)

Virginia Blem and Blem 1985 6.0*, July-August

Various Locals Wright and Wright 1957 3–13**

Various Locals Fitch 1970 5.2* (2–8; n = 17) June to August

Table 1. Three monthly stages in the testicular cycle of 26 adult Haldea striatula males from Oklahoma; * = one June male was in late recrudescence with spermatids present.

Table 2. Three monthly stages in the ovarian cycle of 19 adult Haldea striatula females from Oklahoma; * = no embryos were found.

Table 3. Litter sizes by month for Haldea striatula from the literature; * = mean value, ** = months not given.

In summary, the presence of H. striatula males with re-gressed testes from spring and concomitant sperm in the vasa deferentia, plus one Sep-tember male undergoing spermiogen-esis (Table 1) suggests an aestival sper-matogenesis (sensu Saint Girons 1982) is followed.

***parturition extends into October in H. striatula from Texas (Clark and Fleet 1976).


Clark, Jr., D.R., and R.R. Fleet. 1976. The rough earth snake (Virginia striatula): ecology of a Texas popula-tion. Southwestern Naturalist 20:467-478.

Fitch, H.S. 1970. Reproductive cycles in lizards and snakes. Museum of Natural History, University of Kansas, Miscellaneous Publication 52:1-247.

Fitch, H.S. 1985. Variation in clutch and litter size in New World reptiles. University of Kansas, Museum of Natural History, Miscellaneous Publication 76:1-76.

Ford, N.B., V.A. Cobb, and W.W. Lamar. 1990. Repro-ductive data on snakes from northeastern Texas. Texas Journal of Science 42:355-368.

Goldberg, S.R., and W.S. Parker. 1975. Seasonal tes-ticular histology of the colubrid snakes, Masticophis taeniatus and Pituophis melanoleucus. Herpetologica 31:317-322.

Guidry, E.V. 1953. Herpetological notes from south-eastern Texas. Herpetologica 9:49-56.

McVay, J.D., and B. Carstens. 2013. Testing monophyly without well-supported gene trees: evidence from multi-locus nuclear data conflicts with existing tax-onomy in the snake tribe Thamnophiini. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 68:425-431.

Palmer, W.M., and A.L. Braswell. 1995. Reptiles of North Carolina. University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC.

Powell, R., J.T. Collins, and L.D. Fish. 1994. Virginia striatula (Linnaeus) Rough Earth Snake. Catalogue of American Amphibians and Reptiles 599.1-599.6.

Presnell, J.K., and M.P. Schreibman. 1997. Humason’s Animal Tissue Techniques. The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD.

Rossman, D.A., and V. Wallach. 1991. Virginia Baird

and Girard Earth Snakes. Catalogue of American Amphibians and Reptiles. 529.1-529.4.

Sabath, M., and R. Worthington. 1959. Eggs and young of certain Texas reptiles. Herpetologica 15:31-32.

Saint Girons, H. 1982. Reproductive cycles of male snakes and their relationships with climate and fe-male reproductive cycles. Herpetologica 38:5-16.

Sievert, G., and L. Sievert. 2011. A Field Guide to Oklahoma’s Amphibians and Reptiles. Oklahoma Department of Wildlife Conservation, Oklahoma City, OK.

Stewart, J.R. 1989. Facultative placentotrophy and the evolution of squamate placentation: quality of eggs and neonates in Virginia striatula. American Natural-ist 133:111-137.

Stewart, J.R. 1990. Development of the extraembry-onic membranes and histology of the placentae in Virginia striatula (Squamata: Serpentes). Journal of Morphology 205:33-43.

Tennant, A. 1984. The Snakes of Texas. Texas Month-ly Press, Austin, TX.

Trauth, S.E., R.L. Cox, Jr., W.E. Meshaka, Jr., B.P. But-terfield, and A. Holt. 1994. Female reproductive traits in selected Arkansas snakes, Proceedings of the Arkansas Academy of Science 48:196-209.

Wallach, V., K.L. Williams, and J. Boundy. 2014. Snakes of the World A Catalogue of Living and Extinct Species. CRC Press, Taylor and Francis, New York.

Webb, R.G. 1970. Reptiles of Oklahoma. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman, OK.

Wright, A.H., and A.A. Wright. 1957. Handbook of Snakes, Volume 1. Comstock Publishing Associates, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY.

Appendix: Haldea striatula from Oklahoma examined by county from the Sam Noble Museum (OMNH), Norman, Oklahoma, USA.

Adair OMNH 39278; Atoka OMNH 34544, 41898, 41899, 42970, 42971, 42973, 42975–42977; Carter OMNH 26592, 26594, 26953; Cleveland OMNH 41577, 41578, 41958; Marshall OMNH 27207, 27698, 29364, 29594, 32478, 32482, 34861, 44261, 45201; McCurtain OMNH 24080, 27475, 27478, 27479; Murray OMNH 25814, 26593, 26873, 27523; Muskogee OMNH 40471–40473; Pittsburg OMNH 43834; Pushmataha OMNH 43990, 43991; Tulsa OMNH 23371, 26291, 26579, 26580; Wagoner OMNH 26590, 26591, 34860.

Including the THS in your will is an excellent way to support the value of this organization and the conservation of the herpetofauna of the Sonoran Desert. We would like to recognize and thank anyone who has included the THS in their will. Please contact us so we can express our appreciation. For information about designating the THS in your will, please contact Margaret Fusari, Treasurer, Tucson Herpetological Society, at [email protected].

Remember the THS in Your WillInformation for ContributorsAuthors should submit original articles, notes, book reviews to the editor, either via email using an attached word processed manuscript or by mail to the Society’s address. The manuscript style should follow that of Journal of Herpetology and other publications of the Society for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles. For further information, please contact the editor, at [email protected]


Horned lizards are arguably the most eas-ily recognized lizards of the American Southwest. In decades past, they were collected for the curio or the pet trade and suffered signifi-cant declines in some areas. Today, virtually every state in the western US lists one or more horned lizard species as a species of “special concern,” or threatened or endangered, and generally precludes or discourages collection.

Life and Death in the Regal Horned Lizard (Phrynosoma solare) in central ArizonaBrian K. Sullivan and Elizabeth A. Sullivan, Arizona State University, Phoenix, AZ 85069, USA; [email protected]

R E S E A R C H A R T I C L E

Horned lizards are arguably the most easily recog-nized lizards of the American Southwest. In decades past, they were collected for the curio or the pet trade and suffered significant declines in some areas. Today, virtually every state in the western US lists one or more horned lizard species as a species of “special concern,” or threatened or endangered, and generally precludes or discourages collection. In Arizona, seven different species occur from deserts at almost sea level, to open forests in excess of 3000 m. The Regal Horned Lizard (Phrynosoma solare) is the form most likely encountered on the outskirts of Phoenix, where it feeds almost exclusively on Rough Seed Harvester Ants, Pogonomyrmex rugosus. Each lizard potentially consumes hundreds of ants each day and passes large fecal pellets, sometimes representing more than a third of the length of the respective lizard.

The Union Hills and adjacent Cave Creek flood-plain are protected by the newly formed Sonoran Preserve, and by Cave Buttes, a county flood control area. These preserves comprise portions of the eastern Union Hills, Cave Creek floodplain, and adjacent flats, on the northern edge of the Phoenix Metropolitan region (~33.73° N, 112.06° W). Large areas of creo-sote (Larrea tridentata)-bursage (Ambrosia deltoidea) flats dominated by fine textured alluvial soils were explic-itly targeted for inclusion in the preserves to increase habitat diversity. Seed harvester ants occur in these flats in high densities (15-25 nests per ha; Sullivan et al. 2014). Since 2010, with our colleagues, we have been observing Regal Horned Lizards at this site. In 2015 we began radio-tracking adult Regal Horned Lizards to learn more about the behavior of individuals, espe-cially with respect to movement patterns. We attached small radio-transmitters with waxed thread (or epoxy) to their backs, behind the four large occipital horns. The transmitters represent less than five percent of the lizard’s body mass to avoid over-taxing the lizard. The small backpack radio-transmitters emit a signal for 4-6 months, and fall off when the lizard sheds. These tags have afforded us the opportunity to observe mat-ing behavior and the outcome of predation events far more commonly than has been reported for this spe-cies previously. Some of our preliminary observations are described herein.

Life.—Matings in the Regal Horned Lizard have been recorded in July and August in Arizona, but only rarely (n = 3; Van Devender and Howard 1973). In three years of tracking, we have observed numer-

ous putative courtship events (see below), and one complete mating sequence (Fig. 1). Our observations of the mating event began at 0800 hours, 30 June 2017, at an air temperature of 30 C, when we ap-proached two radio-tagged individuals in the shade of a large creosote shrub. The male maintained physical contact with the female, primarily by touching with his forelimbs, using them alternately to claw lightly at the female’s dorsum. If the female moved forward a short distance, the male followed closely, and resumed touching from immediately behind the female when she stopped. The male climbed onto the female’s hindquarters, appearing to hinder additional move-ment by the female, unless she wriggled side to side dramatically while moving forward. This continued for approximately 15 minutes until the male began to more vigorously climb on to the back of the female, and used his chin to press down on the female’s head. The male did not bite the female, as often described in other mating efforts for lizards (including Phrynosoma). The male appeared to use his forelimbs to firmly grip her on either side of her neck while sliding his hind-quarters under hers, and rotating his body awkwardly to achieve intromission, which happened very quickly once he initiated these movements (Fig. 1). They parted after just under four minutes, and the female immediately adopted the stereo-typical post-copulation

Fig. 1. Mating Regal Horned Lizards (Phrynosoma solare).


The behavioral sequence and duration of copulation we observed in P. solare are strikingly similar to that described for other Phryno-soma, including the duration of intromis-sion of roughly five minutes (reviewed in Howard 1974; Tollestrup 1981; Montanucci and Baur 1982).

display previously reported (P. coronatum, P. douglassi, P. platyrhinos): she elevated her body in a stilted, highly erect posture, with tail raised, and cloaca exposed (pink was visible at the vent), while the male followed closely behind tapping the female’s vent with his snout. After 25 seconds, the female stopped, lowered her body to the ground while continuing to elevate her tail, and the male climbed onto her back yet again, and they re-mained in the shade for additional ten minutes before we departed. Before and after copulation, when the male was positioned on the female’s back, she often elevated her head, tapping the underside of the male’s head repeatedly while moving her head from side to side; the male appeared to respond to this by depress-ing his head against the female.

The behavioral sequence and duration of copula-tion we observed in P. solare are strikingly similar to that described for other Phrynosoma, including the duration of intromission of roughly five minutes (re-viewed in Howard 1974; Tollestrup 1981; Montanucci and Baur 1982). Although this was the only complete mating sequence we have observed, on nine occasions we observed a male with a female in the shade of a shrub in the early morning (11 June to 24 July; median date for these observations = 3 July). When these pairs were approached, the male was immediately behind the female, or mounted on the female’s back (Fig. 2); if the female moved, the male attempted to re-estab-lish contact by rapidly following and clawing at the female’s dorsum. In all instances, the female’s tail was elevated (Fig. 2) numerous times during these observa-tions, suggesting “rejection”, and thus, post-mating accompaniment or guarding on the part of the male. Alternatively, these may have been males that had been rejected by previously mated females. Regardless, we agree with Tollestrup (1981) that post-coitus mounting of females by males is best interpreted as mate guard-ing; similar associations in crotalid snakes have been termed “accompaniment” (Duvall and Schuett, pers. comm.). Independent of terminological differences, presumably this behavior reduces the opportunity for additional matings with other males in these forms.

These observations on reproductive behavior have coincided with our realization that male and female Regal Horned Lizards may differ considerably in their space use. We note that prior quantification of Regal Horned Lizard movements, gathered in the absence of radio-transmitters, were based on the ability of researchers to visually detect these lizards. Given these lizards do make use of particular areas consistently, it is unsurprising that an investigator might see one subject repeatedly in a localized area and conclude it simply did not range widely afield. That caveat aside, Lowe (1954) reported a distance, on average, of 20 m between recaptures, and Parker (1971, 1974) reported 36 m between recaptures. Baharvi (1975) reported a 30 m distance between recaptures as well, but had a few juveniles that moved up to 350 m (no adults moved

nearly this far). Based on these data, Regal Horned Lizards, though largest of the Sonoran Desert species (with a maximum size of about 125 millimeters snout to vent length), have been categorized as a “small home range” species (Baharvi 1975). None of these studies stressed sex related differences in movement patterns, but Stark et al. (2005) concluded that in Texas Horned Lizards, male P. cornutum move more in late spring while searching for mates.

These published data on movement patterns in P. solare contrast with our documentation of three males that moved 1000 m during the summer. A relatively large male (89 mm SVL) moved a total 1011 m in a relatively straight line from south to north over five days (1-5 July 2016), including moves of 250 m and 500 m in 72 hours, only to return to his original home range starting point by 10 July 2016. Another male (91 mm SVL) moved 1001 m in five days (15-20 June 2016), in a relatively straight south to north line, but remained in the new location for two months, having encountered four females he was observed courting. Other males made moves of 500 m within 24 hours on two occasions (in June/July), and every male fol-lowed for more than one month (n = 15) made regular “ping-pong” moves (back and forth) of 100-150 m. The high density of ant nests at Cave Buttes is so extreme that some males—if they followed a straight line during movements—bypassed dozens and dozens of ant nests during long range (1 km) movements. We

Fig. 2. Accompaniment or mate guarding: the male is to the left (upper panel); accompaniment with elevation of the tail by the

female (lower panel).


Although our females moved much less than males, they too ping-ponged between two locales on oc-casion, espe-cially in the late spring and early summer (June/July); during this period they often visited small washes, where they were virtually impossible to detect hidden among dense vegetation at the base of small palo verde, lycium, or hackberry shrubs.

tentatively conclude that rather than searching for prey, males are moving to locate mates, in line with the sug-gestions of Sherbrooke (2002) and Stark et al. (2005) regarding sex biased movement of male P. cornutum in late spring, which they both postulated represent a mate locating tactic.

Although our females moved much less than males, they too ping-ponged between two locales on occa-sion, especially in the late spring and early summer (June/July); during this period they often visited small washes, where they were virtually impossible to detect hidden among dense vegetation at the base of small palo verde, lycium, or hackberry shrubs. We tenta-tively conclude these moves were associated with egg production or possibly oviposition site searching, as more than one female was observed excavating a bur-row at these small wash banks while distended with eggs during July. These might be 100 m from their area of consistent foraging at other times during June, but exact distances moved await more detailed analysis at the conclusion of our four-year study in 2019. Sexual selection is thought to account for sex differences in movement patterns in various snakes, lizards and tortoises, and this appears true for the Regal Horned Lizard as well.

Death.—In spite of their blood squirting behavior, predators killed 25% of the lizards we followed during the summer of 2015 and 33% in 2016. We suspect that roadrunners, hawks, and owls, but primarily small mammalian carnivores, have taken horned lizards at Cave Buttes. Unfortunately, when predation occurs, the remains often provide few cues. Based on meager evidence, we think that some small canids (kit foxes?) capture buried horned lizards at night, and consume everything but the radio tag and the lizard’s stomach, which is usually filled with ants (we find it next to the tag the next morning). As noted by Sherbrooke and Middendorf (2001, 2004), in spite of the effectiveness of blood-squirting in dissuading canid predators, they do sometimes consume horned lizards completely.

Some predation events are more suggestive. More recently (2016-2017), four horned lizard predation events have been similar. When we radio-track a sub-

Fig. 3. Horned lizard fatalities: note the wound at the back of the head and otherwise untouched body.

ject in the early morning, we find the lizard with what appears to be a single bite to the head, with a large wound between the eyes and the occipital horns (Fig. 3). Both eyes appear to have been engaged in a blood squirting event; the wound seems consistent with the notion that a canid bit the lizard just as the blood squirt occurred, delivering a mortal wound. The single bite appears to have been the only injury, but nonethe-less fatal, killing the subject. Two males survived ap-parently similar predation attempts, having been found within a day or so of a blood-squirt event, their entire heads covered in dried blood, with indications both eyes were engaged during the predation event (Fig. 4). Although entirely speculative, we imagine that a canid predator closing its mouth over the lizard’s head did not bite down sufficiently to cause the lizard any harm, other than to direct the blood back onto the lizard’s head as it closed and rapidly opened its mouth.

To date our movement data suggest that males move much more frequently over larger distances than females. For example, no female has moved more than 150 m from her capture site, while virtually every male has moved at least 150 m within a 24 hour period. These movement patterns would traditionally be viewed as contributing to an increased predation risk for males, as suggested for a number of squamates in which males range widely while searching for mates. Nonetheless, we have observed an equal number of mortality events by sex; it may be that the dispropor-tionate time spent foraging by females, especially in the early evening, exposes them to a greater predation risk than movement per se, but this is speculative. We hope to discover more about these predation events in the coming months, but our observations on mortal-ity are consistent with Parker’s assertion that these lizards grow to reproductive maturity within about 12 months, and the population turns over ever 2-3 years.

Acknowledgments—All research was permitted under Arizona Game and Fish Department Scientific Collecting Permits (2010-2017) and ASU IACUC approval. Rob Bowker and K. Sullivan assisted with lizard observations. We thank Wade Sherbrooke for comments and insights about horned lizard behavior and ecology.


Literature Cited

Baharav, D. 1975. Movement of horned lizard P. solare. Copeia 1975(4):649-657.

Howard, C.W. 1974. Comparative reproductive ecology of horned lizards (genus Phrynosoma) in southwestern United States and northern Mexico. Journal of the Arizona Academy of Science 9(3):108-116.

Lowe, C.H. 1954. Normal field movements and growth rates of marked regal horned lizards (P. solare). Ecology 35(3):420-421.

Montanucci, R.R., and B.E. Baur. 1982. Mating and courtship-related behaviors of the short-horned lizard, Phrynosoma douglassi. Copeia 1982:971-974.

Parker, W.S. 1971. Ecological observations on the regal horned lizard (Phrynosoma solare) in Arizona. Herpetologica 27:333-338.

Sherbrooke, W.C. 2002. Seasonally skewed sex-ratios of road-collected Texas Horned Lizards (Phrynosoma cornutum). Herpetological Review 33:21-24.

Sherbrooke, W.C., and G.A. Middendorf III. 2001.

Fig. 4. Horned lizard survivors: note the dried blood covering the male’s head.

Blood-squirting variability in horned lizards (Phrynosoma). Copeia 2001:1114-1122.

Sherbrooke, W.C., and G.A. Middendorf III. 2004. Responses of kit foxes (Vulpes macrotis) to antipredator blood-squirting and blood of Texas horned lizards (Phrynosoma cornutum). Copeia 2004:652-658.

Stark, R.C., S.F. Fox, and D.M. Leslie, Jr. 2005. Male Texas horned lizards increase daily movements and area covered in spring: a mate searching strategy? Journal of Herpetology 39:169-173.

Sullivan, B.K., K.O. Sullivan, D.E. Vardukyan, and T.S. Suminski. 2014. Persistence of horned lizards (Phrynosoma spp.) in urban preserves of central Arizona. Urban Ecosystems 17:707-717.

Tollestrup, K. 1981. The social behavior and displays of two species of horned lizards, Phrynosoma platyrhinos and Phrynosoma coronatum. Herpetologica 37:13-141.

Van Devender, T.R., and C.W. Howard. 1973. Notes on natural nests and hatching success in the Regal Horned Lizard (Phrynosoma solare) in Southern Arizona. Herpetologica 29:238-239.

Sonoran Herpetologist Natural History ObservationsThe Tucson Herpetological Society invites your contributions to our Natural History Notes section. We are particularly interested in photographs and descriptions of amphibians and reptiles involved in noteworthy or unusual behaviors in the field. Notes can feature information such as diet, predation, com-munity structure, interspecific behavior, or unusual locations or habitat use. Please submit your observa-tions to Howard Clark, [email protected]. Submissions should be brief and in electronic form.

The Sonoran Herpetologist welcomes short reports for our Local Research News, a regular feature in our journal. We are interested in articles that can update our readers on research about amphibians and reptiles in the Sonoran Desert region. These articles need be only a few paragraphs long and do not need to include data, specific localities, or other details. The emphasis should be on how science is being applied to herpetological questions. Please submit your materials to Howard Clark, [email protected]. Submissions should be brief and in electronic form.

Local Research News


Chiggers (still) infesting Yarrow’s Spiny Lizard, Sceloporus jarrovii, in the Chiricahua Mountains, ArizonaBrian R. Blais, Corey Shaw, Brandon Mayer, and Colin W. Brocka, University of Arizona, School of Natural Resources and the Environ-ment, 1064 E. Lowell St., Tucson, AZ 85721; [email protected]

N A T U R A L H I S T O R Y N O T E

It is well known that mites and chiggers (the larvae of trombiculid mites) infest many lizard groups (Arnold 1986, Bulté et al. 2009), as over 150 species (≥ 5 genera) of saurians are known hosts to chig-gers (Benton 1987). Concentrated “mite pockets” are small skin invaginations in such places as the nuchal (neck), axilla, groin and postfemoral regions of lizards (Arnold 1986). It is thought that some parasitic mites have co-evolved to target locations on their lizard hosts that would be the least detrimental (Arnold 1986, Benton 1987); that is to say, they ensure a prolonged cache of resources. There is also temporal variability in how long mite pockets remain active on their host individual, and it is not unusual for the duration to extend past 50 days (Goldberg and Bursey 1993).

In the United States, the Yarrow’s spiny lizard (Sceloporus jarrovii Cope, 1875; see Moll 2004) is found in mid-high elevation (1370-3550 m) stretches, often occupying talus slopes, rocky outcrops, and steep cliff habitats in southeast-ern Arizona and extreme southwestern New Mexico (Archie et al. 2006, Schwalbe 2009). This insectivorous species is highly territorial (Halliday et al. 2014), and is a food source for some rare montane rattlesnakes (Schwalbe 2009). Sceloporus jarrovii is also a popular host for chiggers. Populations of S. jarrovii may have over 90% infestation rates of ectoparasites (Bulté et al. 2009). Chigger attachment is always paired and only on the gular regions of S. jarrovii (Goldberg and Bursey 1993, Bulté et al. 2009). Higher ectoparasite loads are associated with an increase in testosterone levels, total colored area (sum of colored throat and side patch areas), and body size of S. jarrovii (Halliday et al. 2014). Halliday et al. (2014) found that larger individuals yielded greater parasite loads due to increased surface area and/or more time to accumulate parasites. Mul-tiple sites within the Chiricahua Mountains (Arizona) revealed high mite loads on S. jarrovii, where some sites showed greater chigger prevalence than others (Bulté et al. 2009).

From 18-19 August 2017, we participated in the Charles W. Painter Bioblitz & BBQ, hosted by the Chiricahua Desert Museum in Rodeo, New Mexico, USA. The event honored the late herpetologist Charlie

Painter with a gathering that Charlie would be proud of: explore the Chiricahua and Peloncillo Mountains to document observable wildlife, especially the herpeto-fauna. Do so while accompanied by those interested in all things natural. Then, finish it off with a big gather-ing of food, stories, and laughter. We happily obliged. It was during this bioblitz, plus an extracurricular survey afterwards, that led us to make some interesting observations. We observed S. jarrovii in multiple loca-tions and of the three we were able to hand-capture, each had orange clusters of chiggers concentrated in the nuchal (gular) regions. All of our captures oc-curred within the Chiricahua-Dos Cabezas mountain system of the Madrean Archipelago, Arizona (see Fig. 2; Archie et al. 2006). On 18 August 2017 at 1623 h we captured a male S. jarrovii on an old fire scarred log in the Barfoot area (31.919°N, 109.280°W ± 10 m; elev. 2505 m). A small, orange mite patch could be seen on its gular region (Fig. 1A). We hand captured another S. jarrovii on 19 August 2017 at 1311 h atop a riparian boulder adjacent E. Turkey Creek (31.909°N, 109.255°W ± 9 m; elev. 2001 m). Again, this individual had a clump of orange chiggers on its gular patch (Fig.

Fig. 1. Parasitizing mite (chigger) clumps on the gular regions of two individuals of Yarrow’s Spiny Lizard (Sceloporus jarrovii)

from the Chiricahua Mountains (AZ). All photos by Brian R Blais.

It is well known that mites and chiggers (the larvae of trom-biculid mites) infest many lizard groups (Arnold 1986, Bulté et al. 2009), as over 150 species (≥ 5 genera) of saurians are known hosts to chiggers (Benton 1987). Concentrated “mite pockets” are small skin invaginations in such places as the nuchal (neck), axilla, groin and post-femoral regions of lizards.


1B and C). While hiking along the Echo Canyon trail in the Chiricahua National Monument on 20 August 2017 (1306 h; 32.003°N, 109.323°W ± 9 m; elev. 1871 m), we observed another S. jarrovii with orange mites present (Fig. 2A). These mites were found on the posterior nuchal region of the individual but were not aggregated in one spot. Several orange mites were seen along the individual’s dorsum and caudal areas (Fig. 2B and C). While the locations on the body are notewor-thy, this was only a single observation and we did not key out the taxonomy of the parasites.

Finding S. jarrovii in these localities or with mites parasitizing them is not new to science. What is interesting is that, although a low sample size, all of our visual or hand-captured observations of S. jarrovii included presence of orange mite pockets (i.e., chig-gers). These findings suggest that high mite prevalence may remain intact for S. jarrovii in the Chiricahua-Dos Cabezas mountain system. We consider each observa-tion to be from disjunct demes or populations (i.e., geographic separation). We also note that our first observation (see Fig. 1) was in the same site vicinity (Barfoot) that previously revealed a lower prevalence of mite infection compared to other demes (Bulté et al. 2009). These observations also suggest there is warrant for a temporal follow-up study to gain further insight into the putative lizard-mite coevolution hypotheses proposed (Arnold 1986, Benton 1987), especially in this sky island system (Archie et al. 2006, Bulté et al. 2009). All observations were vouchered on iNaturalist [(www.inaturalist.org) observations: 7549942, 7566931, 7582469 respectively]. All lizards were re-leased at site of capture immediately following photo documentation.

Literature Cited

Archie, J.W., R.L. Bezy, and E.F. Enderson. 2006. Yar-row’s Spiny Lizard (Sceloporus jarrovii Cope 1875): Lowe’s Line Revisited. Sonoran Herpetologist 19:50-53.

Arnold, E.N. 1986. Mite pockets of lizards, a possible means of reducing damage by ectoparasites. Bio-logical Journal of the Linnean Society 29:1-21.

Benton, M.J. 1987. Host-parasite coevolution. The mite pockets of lizards. Nature 325:391-392.

Bulté, G., A.C. Plummer, A. Thibaudeau, and G. Blouin-Demers. 2009. Infection of Yarrow’s Spiny Lizards (Sceloporus jarrovii) by Chiggers and Malaria in the Chiricahua Mountains, Arizona. The South-western Naturalist 54:204-207.

Goldberg, S.R., and C.R. Bursey. 1993. Duration of attachment of the chigger, Eutrombicula lipovskyana (Trombiculidae) in mite pockets of Yarrow’s Spiny Lizard, Sceloporus jarrovii (Phrynosomatidae) from Arizona. Journal of Wildlife Diseases 29:142-144.

Halliday, W.D., J.E. Paterson, L.D. Patterson, S.J. Cooke, and G. Blouin-Demers. 2014. Testosterone, body size, and sexual signals predict parasite load in Yarrow’s Spiny Lizards (Sceloporus jarrovii). Canadian Journal of Zoology 92:1075-1082.

Moll, E.O. 2004. Sceloporus jarrovii, Cope, 1875—Yar-row’s Spiny Lizard. Patronyms of the Pioneer West. Sonoran Herpetologist 17:38-41.

Schwalbe, C.R. 2009. Yarrow’s Spiny Lizard. Pages 222-225 In Jones, L.L., and R.E. Lovich. Lizards of the American Southwest: a photographic field guide. Rio Nuevo Publishers, Tucson, Arizona.

Fig. 2. Parasitizing mite (chigger) clumps on the neck body and tail regions of

Yarrow’s Spiny Lizard (Sceloporus jarrovii) from Chiricahua National Monument (AZ).

All photos by Colin W. Brocka.

Finding S. jar-rovii in these lo-calities or with mites parasitiz-ing them is not new to science. What is inter-esting is that, although a low sample size, all of our visual or hand-captured observations of S. jarrovii included pres-ence of orange mite pockets (i.e., chiggers).


Author Andrés Vásquez Noboa and photo-grapher Pablo Cervantes Daza have produced a much needed wildlife guide to the biogeo-graphic region of Equador. The book is de-signed for natu-ralists, mam-mal watchers, birders, outdoor enthusiasts, and herpetolo-gists.

Author Andrés Vásquez Noboa and photographer Pablo Cervantes Daza have produced a much needed wildlife guide to the bio-geographic region of Ecuador. The book is designed for naturalists, mammal watchers, birders, outdoor enthusiasts, and herpetologists. The guide is a one-stop treasure trove of information. As noted above, the guide covers four major animal groups: amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals, with each animal described in a species account (discussed further below).

The guide begins with an in-depth discussion on the Plan of the Book. Here, the author discusses his vision of book—to be used not only for identifying species, but also presenting useful information on habitats, ecosystems, and the topography of Ecuador. The biogeography of Ecuador is discussed, giving the reader a basic understanding of why the region is biologically and ecologically rich with detailed discussions on the Andes, the equator, and marine currents. Habitats and bioregions are mapped out, which divides the county into various Andean valleys, lowland rain forests, foothills, subtropical forests, and desert scrub—each yielding unique wildlife to observe and enjoy.

The species accounts make up the bulk of the book. The accounts are well researched, albeit brief at times. Each account is accompanied but a high-quality

photo, presented in such a way that identification in the field is possible. The account is descriptive and contains a general natural history narrative. A small map is next to the text showing where the species ranges and some measurement information.

The author did not follow any particular taxonomic sequence but rather arranged similar species next to each other, to aide in identification rather than organizing the guide in a scientific manner.

The end of the book provides a bibliography, map of main roads and national protected areas, additional photographer acknowledgement, index of common names, and an index of scientific names.

Overall, the book is a must for those visiting or conducting research in Ecuador. At only 288 pages, the book will be easy to carry in the field and will take the place of needing to transport several taxonomic specific guides.

Wildlife of EcuadorHoward O. Clark, Jr., Senior Scientist, Colibri Ecological Consulting, LLC, Fresno, CA; [email protected]

B O O K R E V I E W

Species account example. Note quality photo, range map, and measurement information. Each brief account is headed by the common and Latin name.

Book cover and details.

Wildlife of Ecuador:A Photographic Field Guide to Birds, Mammals, Reptiles, and AmphibiansAndrés Vásquez NoboaPhotography by Pablo Cervantes Daza

Princeton University Press | http://press.princeton.edu

Paperback | 2017 | $29.95 | £24.95 | ISBN: 9780691161365

288 pp. | 5 3/4 x 8 1/4 | 411 color photos. 341 maps.

eBook | ISBN: 9781400885053


M E M B E R S H I P

Membership InformationIndividual $20 Sustaining $30Family $25 Contributing $50Student $14 Life $500

The Tucson Herpetological Society would like to thank existing members and new members for renewing their membership. We appreciate your support and are always looking for members to actively participate in THS activities and volunteer opportunities. It is a great way to be involved with the conservation of amphibians and reptiles in the Sonoran Desert.

Tucson Herpetological Society P.O. Box 709, Tucson, Arizona 85702-0709

MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL FORM

NAME: ________________________________________________ Date ______________ Address or Personal Information Changes_______________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________

MEMBERSHIP DUES

[ ] $20 Individual [ ] $25 Family [ ] $14 Student [ ] $30 Sustaining [ ] $50 Contributing [ ] $500 Life $ _______ Jarchow Conservation Award $ _______ Speakers Bureau $ _______ Flat-tailed horned lizard Fund $ _______ C.H. Lowe Herp Research Fund $ _______ Total (MAKE CHECK PAYABLE TO: TUCSON HERPETOLOGICAL SOCIETY) The THS newsletter, the Sonoran Herpetologist, is delivered online only. Please indicate the email address you would like to receive the newsletter if you are not currently receiving the newsletter at your preferred address. If you are unable to receive the newslet-ter online, please contact Robert Villa at [email protected]. If not already done, please indicate if you want your email added to the THS directory and/or the Monthly meeting announcement (circle one or both). Please return this form with your check to the address above. Email address ___________________________________________________________

BOD minutes can be found here:http://bit.ly/1qcYyGg

M E E T I N G M I N U T E S

Including the THS in your will is an excellent way to support the value of this organization and the conservation of the herpetofauna of the Sonoran Desert. We would like to recognize and thank anyone who has included the THS in their will. Please contact us so we can express our appreciation. For information about designating the THS in your will, please contact Maggie Fusari, Treasurer, Tucson Herpetological Society, at [email protected].

Time to Renew Your THS membership?

Thank you for your membership in the Tucson Herpetological Society. Renewal reminders for upcoming membership expiration will be emailed at the beginning of the month that your membership expires. If you have any questions about your membership or would like to be in touch with a THS member you do not know how to reach, please contact our Membership Coordinator, Robert Villa, by email: [email protected].

The Blunt-nosed Leopard Lizard (Gambelia sila; Stejneger, 1890) is federally and California state-listed as “endangered” and has been protected since the 1960s. It is a medium-sized predatory lizard native to the San Joaquin Valley of California. Photo by Howard O. Clark, Jr., Carrizo Plain National Monument, San Luis Obispo County, CA, USA.


Sonoran Herpetologist (ISSN 2333-8075) is the newsletter-journal of the Tucson Herpetological Society, and is Copyright © 1988-2017. The contents of Sonoran Herpetologist may be reproduced for inclusion in the newsletters of other herpetological societies provided the material is reproduced without change and with appropriate credit, and a copy of the publication is sent to the Tucson Herpetological Society. Occasional exceptions to this policy will be noted. Contents are indexed in Zoological Record. A complete set of back issues are available in the Special Collections area of the University of Arizona library. They are accompanied by a copy of The Collected Papers of the Tucson Herpetological Society, 1988-1991.

Editor-in-ChiefHoward Clark, Jr., [email protected]

Associate EditorsRobert Bezy, [email protected] Dennis Caldwell, [email protected] Suman Pratihar, [email protected] Don Swann, [email protected]

Art Editor Dennis Caldwell, [email protected]

Book Review Editor Philip Brown, [email protected]

Information for ContributorsAuthors should submit original articles, notes, book reviews to the Editor, either via email using an attached word processed manuscript or by mail to the Society’s address. The manuscript style should follow that of Journal of Herpetology and other publications of the Society for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles. For further information, please contact the editor, at [email protected].

LCCN permalink: http://lccn.loc.gov/2013273781

OfficersPresident Robert Villa, [email protected]

Vice President Hanna Strauss, [email protected]

Secretary Don Swann, [email protected]

Treasurer Margaret Fusari, [email protected]

Directors:Mark Barnard (2017-2018)Kathryn Ferguson (2017-2018)Aaron Goldberg (2017-2018)William Cooper (2016-2017)Karina Hilliard (2016-2017)Justin Schmidt (2016-2017)

Membership Robert Villa, [email protected]

Editor Howard O. Clark, Jr., [email protected]

Society ActivitiesMonthly Members MeetingJim Rorabaugh, Program Chair3rd Wednesday, 7:15 PM

Board of Directors MeetingLast Tuesday of each month (except December), 7:00 PM

Speakers Bureau (scheduled presentations)Robert Villa & Ed Moll

Conservation CommitteeDennis Caldwell

Herpetological Information HotlineBob Brandner, (520) 760-0574

Jarchow Conservation AwardOpen

Publications:Sonoran Herpetologist, Backyard Ponds brochure,Living with Venomous Reptiles brochure, THS Herp Coloring Book, THS Collected Papers, 1988-1991

THS Webpagehttp://tucsonherpsociety.orgHeidi Flugstad, Webmaster, [email protected]

The Tucson Herpetological

Society is dedicated to conservation,

education, and research

concerning the amphibians and

reptiles of Arizona and

Mexico. Tucson Herpetological Society

is a registered non-profit organization.

For more information about the THS and the reptiles and amphibians of the Tucson area visit tucsonherpsociety.org

Deadline for Sonoran Herpetologist: 15th of Feb, May, Aug, and Nov (based on the quarterly schedule)

SONORAN HERPETOLOGIST 30 (3) 2017

lawrence l. c. jones - tucson herpetological society · pdf filephotographic field guide to...

Documents