The classification is here!

In response to many posts Anole Annals few weeks ago on the new classification proposed by Nicholoson and al., today the great website The Reptile Database updated the family Polychrotidae and applied the classification Nicholson with the eight genera.

52 species of Anolis
9 species of Audantia
9 species of Chamaelinorops
35 species of Ctenonotus
83 species of Dactyloa
20 species of Deiroptyx
169 species of Norops (the genus Chamaelinorops is included in the link)
11 species of Xiphosurus

Does this application mean that it has been approved by the scientific community?

About luccioco

I'm a french anole enthusiast, not a scientist but I hope I will work on fieldwork in the future. I had or I have: Anolis carolinensis, Anolis porcatus porcatus, Anolis oculatus winstoni, Anolis valencienni, Anolis vermiculatus.

8 thoughts on “The classification is here!

  1. In response to your question, I would say no. Most of the posters to this site strongly disagree with the new taxonomy and, as Jonathan pointed out in his post, there are papers in press arguing against it. The Reptile Database may just change it right back. So I wouldn’t start memorizing taxonomic changes to over 300 species just yet.

  2. I second Yoel’s opinion. A huge chunk of the Anolis community either comments or blogs on this site. It is clear from our previous discussions, the overwhelming majority will not adopt this new taxonomy, and I presume our main arguments for this will be summarized in those upcoming papers. As far as my work is concerned, I will not be using Audantia for the cybotoids (my study group). I deplore the site’s immediate acceptance of the modified taxonomy. Inevitably it will not be adopted by most of the community and it is only going to cause undue confusion. What a mess, I say.

  3. The discourse stimulated by Nicholoson proposed taxonomic changes has brought to mind a nagging issue I hope I could have resolved. I live in Trinidad (the Southern most island in the Caribbean island chain). Unfortunately this island is not represented in the usual Anol-fauna studies Lesser Antillian -Caribbean researchers. As a result our native Anole is not represented in Losos’s authoritative study “Lizards in an Evolutionary Tree” which I constantly make reference to when I travel up the islands photo-documenting endemic species.
    My enquiry is a simple, hopefully, straight-foward one. Is the native species in our forested backyard still classified as A. chrysolepis-planiceps , A. chrysolepis or A. planiceps. Even biologist in our local University – UWI seem to be unclear about the latest pendulum swing on the issue.
    Hope I can have the issue resolved once and for all.
    Thanks in advance,
    Reynold Boyce

  4. Just to bring a different viewpoint, it is important to remember that anole lizards matter not only to a cohesive, US-centered group of anole aficcionados – herpetologists throughout South America happily adopted the new taxonomy, which they consider welcome (and late). Every Brazilian herpetologist I know follows it, and the new scheme was formally adopted by the Brazilian Society of Herpetology (check the official list of Brazilian reptiles in English at http://www.sbherpetologia.org.br/lista_repteis/ListaRepteis12Dezembro2012-INGLES.pdf). Taxonomic stability was not an issue to South American herpetologists during the dramatic re-structuring of amphibian taxonomy, and it’s not being concerning Anolis (or Mabuya). Despite dealing with massive amounts of diversity, these guys adapt quickly to changing taxonomy and readily adopt it – so I find it very hard for ‘Anolis’ to survive around there.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Optionally add an image (JPEG only)