identifier	taxonID	type	CVterm	format	language	title	description	additionalInformationURL	UsageTerms	rights	Owner	contributor	creator	bibliographicCitation
1F824B5DD3D95030AB83A15BB105D149.text	1F824B5DD3D95030AB83A15BB105D149.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Scincella dabieshanensis Zhang, Yi, Zhang & Zhang 2026	<div><p>Scincella dabieshanensis Zhang, Yi, Zhang &amp; Zhang sp. nov.</p><p>Holotype.</p><p>AHU 25079 (Figs 4, 5, 6, 7), a female specimen, collected by Hailin Zhang and Feng Yi on 16 September 2025 from <a href="https://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=115.2&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=31.43" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 115.2/lat 31.43)">Jingangtai</a> (31.43°N, 115.20°E; elevation 620 m a. s. l.), Shangcheng County, Xinyang City, Henan Province, China .</p><p>Paratypes.</p><p>AHU 25078, AHU 20010–20011, AHU 20002, AHU 20068, AHU 21018–21019, AHU 22020, AHU 25080–25093 (2 subadults, 11 adult females, 9 adult males), collected by Hailin Zhang, Feng Yi, Caiwen Zhang and Shihang Xu from the following localities: eleven of these specimens were collected from the type locality — Henan Dabie Mountains National Nature Reserve — while five were obtained from Liankangshan National Nature Reserve in Henan Province, four from the Tiantangzhai Scenic Area in Anhui Province and two from Huangbaishan National Forest Park in Henan Province.</p><p>Etymology.</p><p>The specific epithet dabieshanensis is derived from the type locality, the Dabie Mountains, located at the boundary of Anhui, Henan and Hubei Provinces. We propose the English name of “ Dabie Mountains Ground Skink ” and the Chinese common name is “ Dà Bié Shān Huá Xi ̄ (大别山滑蜥) ”.</p><p>Diagnosis.</p><p>Scincella dabieshanensis sp. nov. can be diagnosed from other Scincella species by the following unique combination of characters: (1) slender body, small size, snout-vent length 24.47–40.60 mm; (2) supraciliaries 6 or 7; (3) midbody scale row counts 28–31; (4) dorsal scales smooth and slightly enlarged, paravertebral scale row counts 55–68, ventral scale row counts 55–64; (5) upper edge of lateral longitudinal stripes relatively wavy, lower edge irregular, covering 2–2.5 scale rows on the trunk; (6) black dorsolateral stripes from posterior corner of eye to lateral side of tail, six rows of dorsal scales in middle; (7) supralabials 7, infralabials 6 or 7; (8) tympanum diameters significantly smaller than palpebral disc diameters; (9) 9–12 enlarged lamellae beneath finger IV and 14–17 beneath toe IV; (10) 3–4 pairs of nuchal scales; (11) when the limbs are pressed down, toes and fingers touch or overlap.</p><p>Description of holotype.</p><p>AHU 25079 (Fig. 7), adult female, small body, SVL 35.59 mm, original full tail, TAL 59.56 mm, TAL / SVL 1.67; snout short, obtuse; lower eyelid with undivided transparent disc; tympanum recessed, oblique margin prominent, the palpebral disc diameter is significantly larger than the tympanic membrane; head elongated, longer than wide, HL 6.88 mm, HL / SVL 0.19, HW 4.71 mm, HW / SVL 0.13, HW / HL 0.68; lightly flattened, HH 3.88 mm, HH / HL 0.56; neck slender, slightly different from the head; Axilla-groin distance relatively short, AGD 18.22 mm, AGD / SVL 0.51; Body slender, MBW / SVL 0.14; toes in contact with fingers when limbs adpressed, FLL 9.64 mm, FLL / SVL 0.27, HLL 13.61 mm, HLL / SVL 0.38, F 4 L 2.37 mm, T 4 L 4.10 mm, FLL + HLL / AGD 1.28.</p><p>Head (Fig. 5). Snout circular in profile and dorsal views, EL 0.81 mm, SNL 2.78 mm, SNL is more than three times EL, EW 1.88 mm, PDD 2.11 mm, ears oval-shaped, tympanum diameter to palpebral disc diameter ratio 0.38, SNL 2.78 mm, EN 2.17 mm, IOD 2.92 mm, IND 2.05 mm, supranasals absent; one frontonasal is trapezoidal, width 0.80 mm, height 1.67 mm, height is about twice the width. In contact with rostral, nasals, 1 st loreal, prefrontals and frontal; PF two, mutually touching, contact the two loreals on both sides and the frontal at the posterior end; frontal slender, longer than wide, diamond-shaped, in contact with the 1 st and 2 nd supraoculars laterally, posterior part is connected to a pair of frontoparietals; two frontoparietals, diamond-shaped, the two scales contact each other along the midline, with the following bordering relationships: Anteriorly: Adjacent to the frontal, Dorsolaterally: Contacting the 2 nd to 4 th supraoculars, Posteriorly: Bordered by the interparietal and parietals respectively, the interparietal is significantly smaller than the frontoparietals. Interparietal small, fan-shaped, anterior edge is rounded and the posterior part contacts the parietals, while the more acute anterior end of the posterior edge protrudes slightly into the gap between the two parietals. Parietals large, touching posteriorly, straightly touching 4 th supraocular, broadly touching anterior secondary temporal laterally and enlarged nuchal scales posteriorly. Enlarged nuchals in three pairs. Nostril oval, in the middle of the nasal; nasal entire, diamond-shaped, width is approximately 1.5 times the height, in contact with the rostral, frontonasal, anterior 1 st loreal and the 1 st supralabial; loreals two, the anterior one rhomboidal, touching 1 st SL ventrally, frontonasals and prefrontals dorsally, anterior loreal, the posterior one slightly larger and inverted subtrapezoidal-shaped, contacting 2 nd and 3 rd SL ventrally, preocular and presubocular, prefrontals and anterior supraciliary scale dorsally; supraciliaries six and six, the anterior two largest; supraoculars four, first supraocular anteriorly contacting frontal, ventrally adjacent to 1 st – 3 rd superciliaries, second supraocular largest, dorsally contacting frontal and frontoparietals, ventrally adjoining 3 rd to 4 th superciliaries, third and fourth supraoculars dorsally contacting frontoparietals, ventrally adjacent to 5 th and 6 th superciliaries, respectively; The lower eyelid possesses a distinct transparent disc (ocular window), margined by diminutive palpebral scales; supralabials seven (left) and seven (right), 1 st smallest, 5 th is below the eye window, 6 th largest; infralabials six (left) and six (right), 1 st smallest, 3 rd largest; TEMP 1 + 2, the anterior one fan-shaped, contacting 6 th and 7 th SL ventrally; secondary temporals two, the upper secondary temporal is the largest, contacting the 7 th SL ventrally; nuchals 3 pairs, contacting the parietal scales, and larger than the adjacent posterior scales; chin shields in three pairs, the first pair in contact medially, contacting 2 nd – 3 rd IfL; the second pair separated by one gular scale, contacting 3 rd – 4 th IfL and the third pair separated by three gulars, contacting 5 th – 6 th IfL.</p><p>Body, limbs and tail (Figs 6, 7). Long and slender body, scales smooth, dorsal scales are conspicuously larger in size compared to the lateral scales and they also show a moderately greater size when contrasted with the ventral scales; MBSR 29, PVSR 58, VSR 56, dorsal scales between dorsolateral stripes 1 / 2 + 6 + 1 / 2, scale rows covered by dorsolateral stripes 2.5, enlarged preanal scale pair one, two scales slightly overlap; limbs pentadactyl, toes in contact with fingers when limbs are adpressed; dorsal surface of the fourth finger and toe mostly covered with two rows of supradigital scales; F 4 S 11, T 4 S 15.</p><p>Coloration of the holotype in life (Fig. 4). In life, the dorsal surface of the head is reddish-brown, irregular dark brown spots are scattered across the back from the head to the tail. Specifically, the dorsal spots on the head and tail are small, while those on the back are relatively large. Ventral surface of the head is creamy white, with several large charcoal – gray patches near the jaw. The dorsal surface is bronze-coloured, with two longitudinal stripes on the dorsal side, with wavy upper and irregular lower edges. The stripes originate from the mouth and nose, pass through the upper lip, extend to the eyes on the back and continue along the sides of the body to the tail. The limbs are brown on the dorsal side, the abdomen is pale cream, ventral tail is grayish white and densely covered with small charcoal – gray spots.</p><p>Coloration of the holotype in preservation (Fig. 7). After a 10 % formalin fix for two days, the samples were washed and stored in 75 % ethanol, the coloration is similar to that in daily life. However, the dorsal side of its head darkens and the abdomen turns blue-gray, the anterior half of the ventral tail is blue-gray, the posterior half is gray and the tip of the tail is yellowish.</p><p>Variation. The paratypes are similar to the holotype in most morphometric and meristic characters and color. Its variation characteristics are as follows: (1) MBSR 28–31; (2) PVSR and VS: 55–68 and 55–64, respectively; (3) SRB 2–2.5; (4) F 4 S 9–12, T 4 S 14–17; (5) NU 3–4; (6) SCI 6–7; (7) IL 6–7; (8) prefrontals not in contact with each other in AHU 21018, AHU 21019, AHU 22020, AHU 25080, AHU 25086. Other minor variations of S. dabieshanensis sp. nov. are listed in Suppl. material 1: table SS 3.</p><p>Distribution and habitat</p><p>(Fig. 8). Scincella dabieshanensis sp. nov. has been found exclusively in four locations: Anhui Tianma National Nature Reserve in Jinzhai County, Luan City, Anhui Province; Huangbaishan National Forest Park in Shangcheng County, Xinyang City, Henan Province; Liankangshan National Nature Reserve in Xin County, Xinyang City, Henan Province; and Henan Dabie Mountains National Nature Reserve, Shangcheng County, Xinyang City, Henan Province. These four sites are located at the junction of Anhui, Henan and Hubei Provinces, all in the hinterland of the Dabie Mountains. All type specimens were collected diurnally at elevations ranging from 400 to 1,000 meters. They were found concealed within rock crevices covered by leaf litter, beneath decaying logs, or adjacent to tree roots. Ambient temperatures during collection measured 28 to 30 ° C, with water sources located approximately 3–5 meters away.</p><p>Comparisons.</p><p>Scincella dabieshanensis sp. nov. most closely resembles S. vandenburghi, S. dunan, S. boettgeri, S. formosensis and S. modesta in sharing six dorsal scale rows between the dorsolateral stripes (DBR = 6); we therefore compared morphology and molecular data across these similar species. A detailed morphological comparison of Scincella dabieshanensis sp. nov. with its closest congeners is provided in Table 3.</p><p>Scincella dabieshanensis sp. nov. differs from S. vandenburghi by: (1) fingers and toes overlapping when limbs are adpressed (yes vs. no); (2) more scale rows covered by dorsolateral stripes (SRB ≥ 2 vs. &lt;2); and (3) more lamellae under toe IV (14–17 vs. 11–14).</p><p>Scincella dabieshanensis sp. nov. differs from S. dunan (Koizumi et al. 2022) by: (1) smaller and densely distributed dark irregular spots beneath dorsolateral stripes (vs. larger spots in S. dunan); (2) absence of light spot interruptions in dorsolateral stripes (vs. frequent interruptions).</p><p>Scincella dabieshanensis sp. nov. differs from S. boettgeri (Van Denburgh 1912) by: (1) numerous dark spots beneath lateral stripes with blurred lower margins (vs. clearly defined stripe boundaries, sometimes bordered by white lines in S. boettgeri); (2) different conditions of the prefrontal scales (in contact or not in contact vs. in contact, in contact at one point, or not in contact).</p><p>Scincella dabieshanensis sp. nov. differs from S. formosensis (Van Denburgh, 1912) by: (1) higher HW / SVL (0.12-0.15 vs. 0.11–0.12); (2) fingers and toes overlapping when limbs are adpressed (yes vs. no); and (3) more scale rows covered by dorsolateral stripes (SRB 2–2.5 vs. usually &lt;2).</p><p>Scincella dabieshanensis sp. nov. differs from S. modesta (Günther, 1864) by: (1) higher number of SCI (6–7 vs. 6); (2) fingers and toes meeting when limbs are adpressed (yes vs. no); (3) SRB ≥ 2 in all individuals vs. usually &lt;2; and (4) tympanum diameter distinctly smaller than palpebral disc (vs. tympanum diameter larger than palpebral disc).</p><p>Compared with other congeners possessing six dorsal scale rows between the stripes, Scincella dabieshanensis sp. nov. differs from S. wangyuezhaoi (Jia et al. 2023) by: wavy upper margin of the dark lateral stripe (vs. relatively straight); fingers and toes overlapping when limbs are pressed to the body (yes vs. no); higher PDD / SVL (0.04–0.08 vs. 0.01–0.04); higher EL / SVL (0.02–0.03 vs. 0.02). From S. barbouri (Stejneger, 1925) it differs in AGD / SVL (0.43–0.54 vs. 0.61–0.65), higher FLL / SVL (0.22–0.31 vs. 0.17–0.20), more MBSR (28–31 vs. 26–28), fewer NU (3–4 vs. 4–5).</p><p>Relative to S. przewalskii (Bedriaga, 1912) it has fewer T 4 S (14–17 vs. 17), more SO (4 vs. 3), more SL (7 vs. 6), more IL (6–7 vs. 6), more SCI (6–7 vs. 4–5) and fewer MBSR (28–31 vs. 32–34).</p><p>It differs from S. darevskii (Nguyen et al. 2010 a) in SVL (24.47–40.60 mm vs. 88.6 mm) and slightly more SCI (6–7 vs. 6) and from S. ochracea (Bourret 1937) in having more SL (7 vs. 5) and shorter AGD (11.38–19.80 mm vs. 26.10–30.00 mm).</p><p>Relative to Chinese congeners with 4, 8 or 10 dorsal scale rows between the stripes, Scincella dabieshanensis sp. nov. differs from S. liangshanensis (Jia et al. 2024) by DBR (6 vs. 4), shorter SVL (24.47–40.60 mm vs. 43.10–61.90 mm), higher MBSR (28–31 vs. 23–27), fewer PVSR (55–68 vs. 69–80), lower EL / PDD (0.38–0.68 vs. 1.25–2.38) and a wavy (vs. straight) upper margin of the lateral stripe; from S. tenuistriata (Xu et al. 2025 a) by lower AGD / SVL (0.43–0.54 vs. 0.54–0.58), lower EL / PDD (0.38–0.68 vs. 1.84–2.25), DBR (6 vs. 4), more T 4 S (14–17 vs. 11–12); from S. potanini (Günther, 1896) by higher MBSR (28–31 vs. 24–27), lower EL / PDD (0.38–0.68 vs. 0.79–1.25), more T 4 S (14–17 vs. 10–13); from S. monticola (Schmidt, 1927) by higher MBSR (28–31 vs. 23–25), more T 4 S (14–17 vs. 10–12), higher FLL / SVL (0.22–0.31 vs. 0.13–0.19), more SRB (2–2.5 vs. 1.5–2), lower AGD / SVL (0.43–0.54 vs. 0.56–0.65) and greater T 4 L / SVL (0.09–0.13 vs. 0.05–0.07); from S. tsinlingensis (Hu et al., 1966) by shorter SVL (24.47–40.60 mm vs. 44.00– 57.40 mm), higher PDD / SVL (0.04–0.08 vs. 0.02), higher MBSR (28–31 vs. 26–28), fewer PVSR (55–68 vs. 70–90), higher HLL / SVL (0.30–0.40 vs. 0.24–0.30) and lower AGD / SVL (0.43–0.54 vs. 0.58–0.70); from S. chengduensis (Jia et al. 2025) by absence (vs. presence) of large dark ventral blotches, higher MBSR (28–31 vs. 23), more VS (55–64 vs. 42–44), more T 4 S (14–17 vs. 10–12), lower AGD / SVL (0.43–0.54 vs. 0.55–0.61) and lower EL / PDD (0.38–0.68 vs. 1.05–1.58); from S. qianica (Xu et al. 2025 b) by lower EL / PDD (0.38–0.68 vs. 1.65–1.92), more SRB (2–2.5 vs. 1–1.5), higher MBSR (28–31 vs. 26), more T 4 S (14–17 vs. 13–14) and more VS (55–64 vs. 46–53); from S. huanrenensis (Zhao &amp; Huang, 1982) by higher MBSR (28–31 vs. 25–28), wavy (vs. straight) upper margin of the dark lateral stripe, lower AGD / SVL (0.43–0.54 vs. 0.58–0.66), higher HLL / SVL (0.30–0.40 vs. 0.20–0.30) and higher HL / SVL (0.18–0.22 vs. 0.13–0.16) (Chen et al. 2001); from S. schmidti (Barbour, 1927) by shorter TAL / SVL (0.66–1.74 vs. 1.90), higher MBSR (28–31 vs. 26), more T 4 S (14–17 vs. 11–12) and tympanum diameter distinctly smaller (vs. about equal) than eye diameter; and from S. reevesii (Gray 1838) by wavy (vs. straight) upper margin of the dark lateral stripe, lower AGD / SVL (0.43–0.54 vs. 0.61–0.66), higher FLL / SVL (0.22–0.31 vs. 0.16–0.19) and higher HL / SVL (0.18–0.22 vs. 0.15–0.17).</p><p>Furthermore, Scincella dabieshanensis sp. nov. can be separated from other Asian congeners by a suite of key morphological characters. It differs from S. fansipanensis (Okabe et al. 2024) in shorter SVL (24.47–40.60 mm vs. 43.50–59.00 mm), shorter AGD (11.38–19.80 mm vs. 26.4–35.4 mm), higher MBSR (28–31 vs. 22–24), more T 4 S (14–17 vs. 10–12). From S. doriae (Boulenger, 1887) by a wavy (vs. straight) upper margin of the dark lateral stripe. It is distinguished from S. badenensis (Nguyen et al. 2019) by fewer MBSR (28–31 vs. 32–36), DBR 6 vs. 10, fewer SCI (6–7 vs. 8–9) and fewer T 4 S (14–17 vs. 18–20); from S. baraensis (Nguyen et al. 2020) by DBR 6 vs. 8, fewer SCI (6–7 vs. 8), fewer T 4 S (14–17 vs. 18–20); from S. melanosticta (Boulenger 1887) by fewer SCI (6–7 vs. 8–9); from S. nigrofasciata (Neang et al. 2018; Nguyen et al. 2024) by fewer MBSR (28–31 vs. 32–33) and DBR (6 vs. 8); from S. rufocaudata (Nguyen et al. 2011) by DBR 6 vs. 10 and fewer SCI (6–7 vs. 8); from S. rupicola (Honda et al. 2003) by fewer MBSR (28–31 vs. 33–36), DBR (6 vs. 8), fewer T 4 S (14–17 vs. 17–21); from S. rara (Darevsky and Orlov 1997) by a single (vs. double) row of lamellae beneath toes and fingers II – IV and higher MBSR (28–31 vs. 24); from S. apraefrontalis (Nguyen et al. 2010 b) by higher MBSR (28–31 vs. 18), more IL (6–7 vs. 5) and more T 4 S (14–17 vs. 8–9); from S. capitanea (Ouboter 1986) by fewer MBSR (28–31 vs. 30–32) and neck narrower than head (vs. neck wider than head); from S. devorator (Darevsky et al., 2004) by fewer T 4 S (14–17 vs. 19) and prefrontals in contact or not (vs. always separated); from S. punctatolineata (Boulenger 1893) by presence (vs. absence) of nuchals, higher MBSR (28–31 vs. 24–26); from S. victoriana (Shreve 1940) by higher MBSR (28–31 vs. 26) and more PVSR (55–68 vs. 50–54); from S. honbaensis (Nguyen et al. 2025) by fewer VS (55–64 vs. 73); from S. ouboteri (Pham et al. 2024) by fewer DBR (6 vs. 8), fewer T 4 S (14–17 vs. 18–20); from S. alia (Bragin et al. 2025 b) by more T 4 S (14–17 vs. 11–13), HL / SVL (0.18–0.22 vs. 0.14–0.17), SRB ≥ 2 in all individuals vs. 1; from S. truongi (Van Pham et al. 2025) by shorter SVL (24.47–40.60 mm vs. 49.00– 59.40 mm), shorter FLL (6.86–10.58 mm vs. 12.3–13.6 mm), shorter HLL (8.67–14.31 mm vs. 17.3–19.6 mm) and shorter HL (5.36–7.96 mm vs. 8.80–9.60 mm); and from S. auranticaudata (Nguyen et al. 2025) by shorter SVL (24.47–40.60 mm vs. 48.90–62.1 mm), fewer SCI (6–7 vs. 8–9), DBR (6 vs. 8), more NU (3–4 vs. 1) and fewer MBSR (28–31 vs. 34–36).</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/1F824B5DD3D95030AB83A15BB105D149	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		Pensoft via Plazi	Zhang, Hailin;Yi, Feng;Yang, Lulu;Wang, Xinjian;Xu, Shihang;Zhan, Zhiqiang;Zhai, Xinyi;Chu, Jun;Hou, Minggen;Zhang, Yucai;Wen, Jing;Zhang, Caiwen;Zhang, Baowei	Zhang, Hailin, Yi, Feng, Yang, Lulu, Wang, Xinjian, Xu, Shihang, Zhan, Zhiqiang, Zhai, Xinyi, Chu, Jun, Hou, Minggen, Zhang, Yucai, Wen, Jing, Zhang, Caiwen, Zhang, Baowei (2026): A new Scincella species (Squamata, Scincidae) from the Dabie Mountains, China, with delimitation of its closely related congeners. Zoosystematics and Evolution 102 (4): 1005-1022, DOI: 10.3897/zse.102.187997
