Teius ameiva, Merrem

Vanzolini, Paulo E. & Myers, Charles W., 2015, The Herpetological Collection Of Maximilian, Prince Of Wied (1782 - 1867), With Special Reference To Brazilian Materials, Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History 2015 (395), pp. 1-155 : 39

Teius ameiva, Merrem

Plate 15

1820 Reise 1: 88.

1821 Reise 2: 337.

1824 Isis : 664 (diagnosis, with reference to Reise 1, 2,

and to Abbildungen).

1824 Abbildungen: Lief. 5 ( fig. 1 of composite pl.).

1825 Beitra¨ge: 170.

PRESENT STATUS: Ameiva ameiva (Linnaeus,

1758).

REMARKS: The only specimen in the collection is AMNH R-615, presumably collected at Cabo Frio. It agrees well with the plate.

Teius cyanomelas Wied, 1824 Plate 15

1824 Abbildungen: Lief. 5 ( fig. 2 of composite pl.).

1824 Isis : 664 (no diagnosis, only reference to the

Abbildungen).

1825 Beitra¨ge: 180.

PRESENT STATUS: Cnemidophorus nativo Rocha et al., 1997 , a nomen protectum designated by Myers et al. (2011: 13), now available as Ameivula nativo ( Rocha, Bergallo and Peccinini-Seale, 1997) .

REMARKS: Peters and Donoso-Barros (1970: 94) credited Teius cyanomelas Wied to the 1825 Beitra¨ge, but publication dates from the 1824 Abbildungen plate (the 1824 Isis article lacks a diagnosis). Wied had one specimen that he figured and named Teius cyanomelas . The type locality is open areas near the mouth of the Rio Mucuri (Bahia, Brazil). The species is listed as ‘‘ Ameiva ( Teius W.) cyanomelas W.’’ in Wied’s handwritten 1860 taxonomic catalog, but the specimen seemingly disappeared after that and was not in the collection that reached the American Museum only a decade later.

Wied’s original, never-published manuscript name for cyanomelas was ‘‘ Lacerta 5- lineata,’’ based on the specimen taken at Mucuri, April 20, 1816. His watercolor-andpen field sketch, with name and data added by his hand, is reproduced in Bosch (1991: 237). It clearly is the sketch copied by Wied’s artist for publication in the Abbildungen as Teius cyanomelas ( Wied, 1824 , Lief. 5).

Myers et al. (2011: 5, 7, 9–11, fig. 2 ) clarified the nomenclatural history of this species, which was discovered by Wied : He supplied his manuscript name Teius cyanomelas to H.R. Schinz, who published it as Lacerta cyanomelas . But neither Lacerta cyanomelas Schinz, 1822 nor Teius cyanomelas Wied, 1824 , was used as a valid name after 1899 and both are qualified as nomena oblita, whereas the relatively well-known junior name Cnemidophorus nativo Rocha et al., 1997 , was designated the valid name under provisions of the Code (ICZN, 1999: art. 23.9.1.2).

Figures

Fig. 1. Paulo E. Vanzolini. On Serra Tapeque´m (a tepui remnant), Roraima, NE Brazil (July 14,

Fig. 2. Pen-and-watercolor sketches dated 1815 and attributed to Prince Maximilian. Top: Gesamtansicht der Expedition (‘‘General View of the expedition’’), showing pack mules, handlers, and military guard. Bottom: Prinz Maximilian mit Teilnehmern seiner Expedition (‘‘Prince Max with members of his expedition’’). From Bosch, 1991: 84–85. (Courtesy of Brazilian Library of Robert Bosch GmbH, Stuttgart)