identifier	taxonID	type	CVterm	format	language	title	description	additionalInformationURL	UsageTerms	rights	Owner	contributor	creator	bibliographicCitation
03E65023147BFFB1FF17FE9FBA250FE2.text	03E65023147BFFB1FF17FE9FBA250FE2.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Microgecko khabrensis Akbarpour & Fathinia & Ebrahimipour & Sahebi 2026	<div><p>Microgecko khabrensis sp. nov. (Figures 2–6; Table 1)</p><p>Holotype (Fig. 2; Table 1). IUZM.144 is an adult male collected from the southern part of <a href="https://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=56.47911&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=28.537027" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 56.47911/lat 28.537027)">Khabr National Park</a>, Kerman Province, southern Iran, at coordinates 28°32'13.3"N, 56°28'44.8"E, and 950 m above sea level. The specimen was collected on 20–21 November 2023 by Morteza Akbarpour.</p><p>Paratypes (Fig. 3; Table 1). IUZM.168–IUZM.170 (n=3), 2 adult males (IUZM.168 –169), and one adult female (IUZM.170), collected at the same locality as the holotype on 20–21 November 2023 by Farnaz Ebrahimipour .</p><p>Diagnosis. Microgecko khabrensis sp. nov. is a small gecko with a maximum known snout-vent length (SVL) of 28.9 mm. The species shares all morphological diagnostic generic characters with its congeners (sensu Bauer et al. 2013). Microgecko khabrensis sp. nov. has a dorsum with incomplete crossbars, limited to dark blotches on the flanks (Figs. 2, 3); 2 (rarely 3) postmental pairs; five scales bordering nostril (SBN) (Fig. 4a–d); 119–129 ventral scales from behind the postmentals to the margin of the vent (GVA); range of dorsal scales in midline between axilla to groin (AGS) 75–90; supranasals (internasals) mostly in contact (Figs. 4e–f); interorbital scales (IOS) 26–27; crossbars on tail 5–6. Microgecko khabrensis sp. nov. has 9 supralabial and 8–9 infralabial scales (Fig. 5a).</p><p>Description of the holotype (Figs. 2, 4a, 4e, 5a, 5d, 6a, 6e). An adult male with a regenerated tail; SVL 28.9 mm; TL 16.9 mm; tail cylindrical; head stout with distinct eyes, HL 6.51 mm; HH 4.11 mm; HW 5.46 mm; ED 1.68 mm; EO 0.49 mm; NED 2.14 mm; EED 2.40 mm; IOD 3.49 mm; neck distinct from head; LFL 7.07 mm; LHL 11.77 mm; TrL 12.97 mm; rostral pentagonal, broader than high, divided by a median suture, in contact with the first supralabials, nostrils, and two postrostrals; nostril on each side of head surrounded by 5 scales (SBN), including rostral, first supralabial, enlarged postrostral, and two nasal scales (Fig. 4a), two large postrostrals (internasals or supranasals) separating nostrils; enlarged postrostrals are separated by a tiny granular scale at the anterior midline while they are in contact from the middle to posterior margin, a pair of enlarged scales (post-internasals) behind postrostrals, post-internasals not in contact (separated by two tiny granules), smaller than postrostrals; internasals, but not post-internasals, in contact (Fig. 4e); small juxtaposed granules covering snout (Figs. 4a, 4e) are distinctly larger than those on crown and upper sides of head and occiput; granules on sides of snout (Fig. 4e) somewhat larger than those on midline; IOS 27; 9 supralabials on each side, 4 supralabials anterior to eye on each side (Fig. 5a), posterior labials distinctly larger than succeeding small granules; 9 infralabials on each side; mental nearly triangular, bordered by first infralabials, and first pair of postmental shields, extending posteriorly to the anterior part of middle suture of the first infralabials, sharply pointed behind, slightly broader (1.33 mm) than long (1.20 mm), followed by one pair of large nearly pentagonal postmentals, which are in contact, more or less equal to first infralabial, and in contact with the mental, the first infralabials, the second postmentals, and 3–4 posterior granules (Figs. 5b, 6a); first pair of postmentals (SSFPM) in contact with one another; 6 granules separated second pair of postmentals (SSPM) (Fig. 5b); 8 scales (including the second pair of postmentals) in a row just postereior to the first postmental shields and between the first and second pair of infralabial scales (SBIL), with a narrower contact with the first pair of infralabials than the second pair (Fig. 5b); scales of chin and throat granular and juxtaposed (Figs. 5b, 6a). Dorsum covered with equal, smooth, juxtaposed small scales (Fig. 5d); scales of venter smooth, flat, not imbricate, larger than those of dorsum (Fig. 5c); scales of upper surfaces of limbs slightly larger than those of dorsum, scales of lower surfaces of limbs like those of venter, slightly smaller; femoral or precloacal pores absent.</p><p>Tail covered above and below with smooth scales, slightly imbricate, distinctly larger than those of dorsum and venter, arranged in regular transverse series, 2 dark crossbars on the anterior intact part of tail, narrower than lighter interspaces, each dark band gradually becomes darker anteriorly from light brown to dark brown posteriorly (Fig. 2); two large post-cloacal sacs; digits covered above with smooth, small juxtaposed scales, below with single series of smooth lamellae, 13 under fourth toe on each side, toe somewhat angularly bent; 129 ventral scales from behind the postmentals (at the apex of mental) to level of vent (GVA); 89 dorsal scales in midline between axilla and groin (AGS); 77 scales around mid-body (SAM).</p><p>Coloration of preserved specimens. Coloration of the preserved holotype (IUZM.144) is almost the same as the paratypes. The upper body surface of the holotype and paratypes is uniformly brownish, with no crossbars on the dorsum, the crossbars restricted to the flanks as three pairs of dark brown blotches, the sacral one extends on the dorsal parts as a discontinuous band, comprising three distinct or indistinct parallel blotches (Figs. 2–3). A wide dark or dark brown bar on either side runs from behind the rostral, through the eye and ear opening to behind the forelimbs; the lower surfaces of the head, trunk, and tail are whitish (Figs. 2–3).</p><p>Variation in paratypes (Figs. 3, 4b–d, 4f, 5c, 6b–d, 6f–h). IUZM.170 has lost its tail due to autotomy, while IUZM.168 and IUZM.169 have complete but broken at their base, which happened during the study (Table 1). Paratypes are similar to the holotype in scalation, coloration, and pattern. The meristic characters for IUZM.168, IUZM.169, and IUZM.170 follow, respectively as separated by a slash: 2/3/2 pairs of postmental shields (PMP), though the left side in IUZM.169 was damaged during collection, making only two postmentals countable on that side (Fig. 6c); 9/9/9 supralabials (SL) on each side; 4/4/4 supralabials anterior to eye on each side; 9/8/9 and 9/8/8 infralabials (IL) on the right and left sides, respectively; 0/0/1 granules separated the first pair of postmentals (SSFPM) (Fig. 6b–d); 8/7/8 granules separated second pair of postmentals (SSPM) (Fig. 6b–d); 10/9/10 scales in a row just postereior to the first postmental shields and between the first pair of infralabial scales (SBIL) (Fig. 6b–d); 26/26/26 interorbital scales including ciliary ones (IOS) (Fig. 6f–h); 5/5/5 scales bordered the nostril (SBN) on each side (Fig. 4b–d); 2/2/2 large postrostrals (internasals) in contact (Figs. 4f &amp; 6f–h); a pair of enlarged postinternasals, in contact, and slightly smaller than postrostrals (Figs. 4f &amp; 6f–h); 13/15/13 lamellae under the fourth toe on the right; 122/127/119 scales from behind the postmentals to level of vent (GVA); 90/75/84 dorsal scales in midline between axilla to groin (AGS); number of scales around mid-body (SAM) 76/87/74.</p><p>The metric characters for IUZM.168, IUZM.169, and IUZM.170 are as follows, respectively, as separated by a slash: snout-vent length (SVL) 27.73/26.3/ 26.64 mm; head length (HL) 6.34/6.95/ 6.64 mm; head width (HW) 4.91/4.94/ 4.60 mm; head height (HH) 3.34/3.82/ 3.29 mm; eye diameter (ED) 1.70/1.76/ 1.79 mm; interorbital distance (IOD) 2.28/2.04/ 2.70 mm; anterior eye margin to posterior edge of nostril distance (NED) 2.18/2.37/ 1.96 mm; posterior eye margin to ear distance (EED) 2.27/2.20/ 1.97 mm; length of right forelimb (LFL) 8.54/9.14/ 8.71 mm; length of hindlimb (LHL) 11.56/11.86/ 11.32 mm; trunk length from axilla to groin (TrL) 10.99/9.96/11.80; vent length (VL) 2.27/2.07/ 1.78 mm; width of caudal base (WCB) 2.81/2.65/2.16.</p><p>Comparison with other species of Microgecko (Table 3)</p><p>Microgecko khabrensis sp. nov. shows the greatest resemblance, both morphologically and genetically, to M. chabaharensis and M. cf. chabaharensis, but differs in the presence of dark blotches of the flanks or sacral region (versus no crossbars or blotches on dorsum or flanks in both lineages of M. chabaharensis), and in having mostly 2 (rarely 3) postmentals (versus 3), and a broader range for AGS (i.e., 75–90 versus 85–86) (Table 3) (Gholamifard et al. 2016).</p><p>Microgecko khabrensis sp. nov. differs from M. persicus persicus, M. p. bakhtiari and M. p. euphorbiacola by having 26–27 interorbital scales (compared to 15–22); dorsal crossbars reduced to large blotches on the flanks, sacral crossbar broken into three dark parallel blotches (versus either no crossbar or 5 crossbars in M. p. persicus, and 4–5 in the other two subspecies), and 5–6 crossbars on the tail (compared to 6–10) (Masroor et al. 2020).</p><p>Microgecko khabrensis sp. nov. is distinguished from M. varaviensis and M. laki by having mostly 2 (rarely 3) postmental pairs (versus 1); 9 supralabials (versus 6 in M. laki and 6–7 in M. varaviensis); 8–9 infralabials (versus 5–6); 5 scales bordering the nostril (versus 4 in M. varaviensis and 4–5 in M. laki); GAV 119–129 (versus 101–114 in M. varaviensis); supranasals large, in contact (versus large, separated in M. varaviensis); post-supranasals large, mainly in contact (versus large, separated); first pair of postmentals mostly in contact (versus separated); dorsal crossbars reduced to blotches on the flanks (versus no dorsal crossbars or 5 in M. laki) (Gholamifard et al. 2019; Masroor et al. 2020; Torki 2020).</p><p>Microgecko khabrensis sp. nov. differs from both Microgecko h. helenae and M. h. fasciatus, by having the following characteristics: 9 supralabials (compared to 5–8), four supralabials anterior to the eye (versus 3); 8–9 infralabials (versus 5–8); post-supranasals primarily in contact (versus mostly separated, rarely in contact); 74–87 scales across midbody (versus 60–75); dorsal crossbars reduced to large blotches on the sides, with the sacral crossbar broken into three dark parallel blotches (compared to none or 5–7 dorsal crossbars on the back edged with white in the rear), and 5–6 crossbars on the tail (compared to none or 7–12) (Masroor et al. 2020).</p><p>Microgecko khabrensis sp. nov. can be easily distinguished from Microgecko latifi by having 5 scales bordering the nostril (versus 4); mostly 2 (rarely 3) pairs of postmentals (versus no postmental); 9 supralabials (versus 6); 8–9 infralabials (versus 5); 26–27 interorbitals (versus 16–19); GAV 119–129 (versus 120); post-supranasals large, mainly in contact (versus large, separated); 74–87 scales around midbody (versus 72); dorsal crossbars reduced to large blotches on the flanks, sacral crossbar broken into three dark parallel blotches (versus 5 complete crossbars) (Masroor et al. 2020).</p><p>Microgecko khabrensis sp. nov. shows significant differences from M. tanishpaensis, with 9 supralabials (versus 10–11); 13–15 lamella under the fourth toe (versus 17–19); GVA 119–129 (versus 144–156); supranasals large, in contact (versus separated); post-supranasals large, mainly in contact (versus separated); first pair of postmentals mainly in contact (versus mainly separated); no precloacal pores (versus 6); reduced dorsal crossbars into blotches on the flanks (versus 3 dorsal crossbars) (Masroor et al. 2020).</p><p>Microgecko khabrensis sp. nov. differs from M. depressus in having mostly 2 (rarely 3) large postmental pairs (versus absent or rarely 1–2 very small ones); 26–27 interorbital scales (versus 16–20); 13–15 lamella under the 4 th toe (versus 16–18); 5 scales bordering nostrils (versus 4); AGS 75–90 (versus 65–73); supranasals large and differentiated from adjacent scales (versus not differentiated from adjacent scales); post-supranasals large, mainly in contact (versus not present); first pair of postmentals mainly in contact (versus separated); no precloacal pores (versus 2–5); reduced dorsal crossbars into blotches on the flanks (versus 3–5 complete dorsal crossbars) (Masroor et al. 2020).</p><p>Etymology. The specific epithet khabrensis refers to Khabr National Park in Kerman Province, southern Iran, where the holotype was collected. It is derived by combining the locality’s name with the Latin suffix -ensis, meaning ‘from’ or ‘belonging to’. The name is given in recognition of the ecological and biodiversity significance of this protected area.</p><p>Habitat notes. The ecology of Microgecko khabrensis sp. nov. remains poorly understood. The holotype (IUZM.144) and three paratypes (IUZM.168 to IUZM.170) were collected on 20–21 November 2023, between 20:00 and 02:00. All specimens were found on a semi-arid plain with a sandy-gravelly substrate, interspersed with rocky outcrops and low hills (Fig. 8), located on the southern margin of Khabr National Park, Kerman Province, southern Iran (28°32'13.3"N, 56°28'44.8"E; 950 m a.s.l.), approximately 20 km northeast of Orzouiyeh city. Vegetation in the area is typical of xeric habitats, dominated by sparse xerophytic shrubs and scattered trees of Ziziphus spp. (locally known as “Konar”), forming open woodland patches. The region has a dry, warm climate with sharp diurnal temperature fluctuations. The species is nocturnal and was observed to begin surface activity shortly after dusk. All individuals were encountered actively foraging or moving on the ground among rocks and vegetation.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03E65023147BFFB1FF17FE9FBA250FE2	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.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Akbarpour, Morteza;Fathinia, Behzad;Ebrahimipour, Farnaz;Sahebi, Alireza	Akbarpour, Morteza, Fathinia, Behzad, Ebrahimipour, Farnaz, Sahebi, Alireza (2026): A new species of the genus Microgecko Nikolsky (Sauria: Gekkonidae) from Kerman Province, southern Iran. Zootaxa 5853 (1): 47-65, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5853.1.3, URL: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5853.1.3
03E650231472FFB7FF17FAF8BB890B30.text	03E650231472FFB7FF17FAF8BB890B30.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Microgecko (Kluge 1983)	<div><p>An updated key to the species of the genus Microgecko (adapted from Masroor et al. 2020)</p><p>1a. Precloacal pores in males present..................................................................... 2</p><p>1b. Precloacal pores absent............................................................................. 3</p><p>2a. Internasals (supranasals) not differentiated from adjacent scales, not in contact with nostril; four scales border nostril; postmentals absent, or one small pair......................................................... M. depressus</p><p>2b. Internasals (supranasals) differentiated from adjacent scales, in contact with nostril; five scales border nostril; two pairs of postmental shields, sometimes one large and the other smaller, that can be differentiated from the surrounding gulars....................................................................................... M. tanishpaensis</p><p>3a. Postmental shields absent....................................................................... M. latifi</p><p>3b. Postmental shields present........................................................................... 4</p><p>4a. A single pair of postmentals.......................................................................... 5</p><p>4b. Two or three pairs of postmentals..................................................................... 8</p><p>5a. Black crossbars on tail bordered with white posteriorly............................................... M. laki</p><p>5b. Black crossbars on tail not bordered with white posteriorly................................................. 6</p><p>6a. Postmentals in contact or not; five distinct dark crossbars on dorsum with white posterior margins....... M. h. fasciatus</p><p>6b. Postmentals not in contact; dark crossbars of body indistinct or absent, sometimes two dorsolateral series of white spots. ................................................................................................ 7</p><p>7a. Dark crossbars of body indistinct or absent; five scales border nostril; supranasal scales mostly in contact................................................................................................... M. h. helenae</p><p>7b. No dorsal crossbars on body, with two light dorsolateral series of white spots; four scales border nostril; supranasal scales separated by two scales.................................................................. M. varaviensis</p><p>8a. Two or three pairs of postmentals; dark dorsal crossbars on body absent....................................... 9</p><p>8b. Two pairs of postmentals; dark dorsal crossbars on body and tail distinct..................................... 10</p><p>9a. Two pairs of postmentals; dark dorsal crossbars reduced to dark blotches only on the flanks, sacral crossbar modified into three discontinuous parallel blotches.................................................. M. khabrensis sp. nov.</p><p>9b. Three pairs of postmentals; dark dorsal crossbars on body or flanks absent........................ M. chabaharensis</p><p>10a. Dark dorsal crossbars of body and tail broader than interspaces.............................. M. persicus bakhtiari</p><p>10b. Dark dorsal crossbars of body and tail narrower than interspaces............................................ 11</p><p>11a. Dark dorsal crossbars less than half the width of interspaces...................................... M. p. persicus</p><p>11b. Dark dorsal crossbars as wide as or slightly narrower than interspaces......................... M. p. euphorbiacola</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03E650231472FFB7FF17FAF8BB890B30	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.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Akbarpour, Morteza;Fathinia, Behzad;Ebrahimipour, Farnaz;Sahebi, Alireza	Akbarpour, Morteza, Fathinia, Behzad, Ebrahimipour, Farnaz, Sahebi, Alireza (2026): A new species of the genus Microgecko Nikolsky (Sauria: Gekkonidae) from Kerman Province, southern Iran. Zootaxa 5853 (1): 47-65, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5853.1.3, URL: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5853.1.3
