Taxon name
Teratoscincus keyserlingii
Strauch, 1863
Uploaded by
National Red List Database
Taxonomic information
Scientific name
Teratoscincus keyserlingii
Strauch, 1863
Assessed taxon level
Species
Higher level taxonomic groupings
Vertebrates
Reptiles
Species authority
Strauch, 1863
Taxonomic notes and synonyms listed
Macey et al. (2005) conducted a phylogenetic analysis of the genus Teratoscincus and concluded on genetic grounds that T. keyserlingi (until then regarded as a subspecies of T. scincus) should be considered a valid species. This author did not, however, conduct any morphological work to determine whether the proposed arrangement represented a morphologically diagnosable species (P. Uetz pers. comm. 2013). Subsequently, Wagner et al. (2016) noted that most Afghan records of this species appear to be referable to T. keyserlingi. These authors note that the assignment of Afghan records to the two taxa is ""complicated"", although they recognize both as distinct species occurring in Afghanistan.Nazarov et al. (2017) subsequently elevated the isolated Fergana Valley form T. s. rustamowi to specific status based on both molecular and morphological methods and clarified range limits within Teratoscincus as presently understood. Although the Arabian subpopulation of this species is isolated and restricted to the United Arab Emirates (the), Teratoscincus keyserlingii from Bandar-e-Abas in Iran and the United Arab Emirates (the) are genetically similar.
Location and scope
Specific locality or subnational name or regional name
United Arab Emirates (the)
Scope (of the Assessment)
National
Countries included within the scope of the assessment
United Arab Emirates (the)
Does the assessment cover a marine EEZ area(s)?
Not_assigned
Conservation Status
Assessed as
Critically endangered
Qualifying criteria (if given)
A3c+4c
Criteria system used
IUCN
(see Assessment details)
Assessment rationale/justification
Within the United Arab Emirates, this species is found in scattered populations from Abu Dhabi to Ras Al Khaimah in the sandy deserts. Both the area of occupancy (216 km<sup>2</sup>) and the extent of occurrence (EOO 6,531 km<sup>2</sup>) and are restricted. The population is considered severely fragmented as a result of habitat loss and fragmentation caused by development and road construction, especially in coastal areas. A continuing decline in the number of mature individuals of at least 80% has been observed, and this is projected to continue into the future, based on ongoing declines in AOO and the extent and quality of habitat.The species is assessed as Critically Endangered (CR A3c+4c) based on a suspected future population decline of at least 80% in the next three generation lengths (30-45 years), and on a similar level of decline over a timeframe of three generation-lengths that commenced in the 1990s. This taxon is not a non-breeding visitor, and it is presumed that any immigration from populations outside the UAE is not significant, and therefore there is no adjustment to the Category according to the IUCN regional and national Guidelines (IUCN 2012).
Assessment details
Assessors/contributors/reviewers listed
UAE National Red List Workshop
Criteria system used
IUCN
Reference for methods given
IUCN. 2012. IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria: Version 3.1, Second edition. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK. iv + 32pp pp. And IUCN. 2012. Guidelines for Application of IUCN Red List Criteria at Regional and National Levels: Version 4.0. Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK: IUCN. iii + 41pp.
Further information
Endemism (according to assessment)
Endemic to region
Not assigned
Taxon distribution as listed in assessment
Within the United Arab Emirates, the species is found in severely fragmented populations from Ras Al Khaimah to Abu Dhabi in the sandy deserts from sea level to 200 asl (Burriel-Carranza et al. submitted). The population comprises four distinct subpopulations that are genetically the same from 15 known locations. The populations are considered to be severely fragmented due to the development of urban areas and the construction of roads. Combining historic records with the results from 2012-2017 surveys (Soorae et al. 2018) clearly indicated areas where the species is now extinct.Globally, the species distribution ranges from the United Arab Emirates (Sindaco and Jeremäenko 2008, Gardner 2009), to Iran (Baig and Masroor 2008, Gholamifard et al. 2015), western Pakistan (Khan 2002) and southwestern Afghanistan (Nazarov et al. 2017). It is found from sea level to around 1,500 m asl. A sight record reported from near Doha in 1973 (Arnold 1977) has never been confirmed and should be discounted (Gardner 2013). Cogalniceanu et al 2014 during their preliminary report on the distribution of the lizard in Qatar could also not confirm the species extant.
Is there a map available in assessment?
Yes
Habitat and systems
Ecological system type
Habitat
Habitat details as listed in assessment
A medium-sized gecko, it is a nocturnal and solitary species. It is mainly a psammophilus species (often found between sand dunes). It is largely recorded from fine, silty soils, loose sand, salt-encrusted sand, sand mixed with gravel, occasionally also recorded on hard clayey soil (Minton Jr 1966, Anderson 1999, Szczerbak and Golubev 1996). The areas of occupancy have varying vegetation from dry open woodland through sparse scrubland and to dry grassland (Anderson 1999). The species is associated with vegetated areas.Animals live in burrows of about 25 to 40 cm depth; they are also used as shelters in the summer and winter (Minton Jr 1966). The female lays several clutches of one or two eggs annually (Szczerbak and Golubeve 1996). Longevity in the species has been recorded as between 17-23 years in captivity. The species attains reproductive age at two to three years and breeds for many years before attaining senescence. Given that longevity in the wild is likely to be lower than in captivity, the generation length is estimated at 10-15 years.
Threats and conservation measures listed
Threats listed in assessment
Major threats include habitat loss and severe fragmentation due to roads, development and urbanisation. Minor threats include driving off-road to target animals due to local stigma, and predation by feral cats. The major threats are ongoing and predicted to increase in the future and likely to affect the majority of the population (up to 90%).Due to its nocturnal activity in habitats away from residential areas, T. keyserlingii is an unknown species for most people, so has no local name. Villagers enter their livestock into these areas for grazing on the short grass cover. Most likely some aspects of behaviour and ecology of T. keyserlingii such as antipredator behaviour of hiding in the bushes, availability of insect prey, multidimensional interactions of this gecko with its insect prey and host plants of its prey, etc. are affected by feeding of livestock on the herbaceous cover of these areas (Gholamifard et al. 2015).Collection for the international pet trade is a threat to this species.
Publication
Els, J., Allen, D., Hilton-Taylor, C., Harding, K. (2019). UAE National Red List of Herpetofauna: Amphibians & Terrestrial Reptiles, Sea Snakes & Marine Turtles. MOCCAE, UAE
