Possible Pachytriton labiatus spermataphore pickup??

anothernewtfan

New member
Joined
Mar 6, 2009
Messages
48
Reaction score
2
Points
0
Country
United States
Display Name
Michael Jeffries
Last night I noticed my large female Pachytriton labiatus looking very interested in the males fanning. After a closer look I saw a small white "object" stuck to her cloaca. I immediately got excited thinking it was a spermataphore packet. I watched closely to see if it became dislodged but it did not, and within 30 minutes I could no longer see it. Was I mistaken? Well I hate to dangle this because I can't find my cable to upload pictures:eek: but I did take pictures and one of them is decent. The object looked like a white developing embryo, somewhat curled at one end.
This pair was recently transferred out of there 55 gallon home with a 2:2 sex ratio because of fighting between the two males.
 
Sounds very much like a spermatophore! Fingers crossed that it is. Make sure the female has some nice caves to lay her clutch in if she has mated successfully - I've heard that an upturned clay flowerpot with a doorway cut into the rim works well.

Hope you find that photo cable soon...!

C
 
hpqscan0003.jpg
 
wow, looks very positive to me, its completely sure a pick up. what frightens me is that the animal in the pic isn't a P.labiatus at all. The pattern resembled me a Archospotus from the beginning but no clue at all. Also one of those atypical P. brevipes pictured in Reptilia magazine from 2004.
cheers,
 
What I can see for color and pattern are consistent with P.granulosus. However, there's very little for useful ID characteristics in that picture. Ventral color is useless, and dorsal color only semi-useful as an average measure.
 
I will try and get some better pictures up of all my Pachytriton. The female in question has really gorgeous ventral colors.
 
Frogeyes, I have read the thread in which you explain the current taxonomy issues concerning Pachytriton, and it was very informative to say the least. But when you say ventral color is almost useless as an indicator things get muddy to me. Basically it seems many are wrong in assuming their paddletails are P. labiatus. I am no expert, but this is the first I have heard of P. granulosus. If the new pictures tell you anything I would appreciate your help.
I bought this pair from a Petco near St. Louis around 2004. They were being housed with fire belly toads in about an inch of water. I checked back and they never got another shipment( now I realize that was a good thing).
One more question, is this Archospotus a different genus?
 
Ventral color changes enormously with age in Pachytriton. Juvenile P.granulosus look much like Hypselotriton orientalis, but old and large specimens can be very marbled on the underside, with virtually no red coloring left. Most of the animals in the North American pet trade come from a single region and will thus be P.granulosus. Since that is also the species which is most variable in color...color won't help much. This is the smallest and most elongate of the four species, though a large and fat animal might be hard to identify properly without a ruler and some MS-222.

That said...the pictures above leave me wondering, but I am still inclined to think the newt is elongate enough to easily be P.granulosus.

Regarding the name Pachytriton granulosus: This species was named many decades ago, based on juvenile animals from Zhejiang. I think those specimens were destroyed in WW2, which means all that remains is the published description, which includes good illustrations.Because juveniles differ in proportions, color, and skin texture, this species was later named to a new genus: Pingia. Subsequently, they were considered to just be juvenile torrent newts, and were thus dissolved first into P.brevipes, and later into P.labiatus.

Recently, it was discovered that larger, P.brevipes-like animals in Hunan were an anatomically distinct species, described as P.archospotus. This is not a new genus, but a new species. The dorsal color of this species is similar to most P.brevipes, though this is a color also found in Mt. Dapan animals and in some P.granulosus. The most distinctive feature is straight epibranchial bones, which give this species a longer head.

More recently, a small orientalis-like newt was discovered in Zhejiang. This was thought to be a distinct species, and was also thought to be the rediscovery of P.granulosus. The authors considered these to NOT be a Pachytriton, but a distinct genus, so they revalidated Pingia granulosa. Dubois and Raffaelli went further, considering this to be the same group of species as Cynops orphicus and Cynops orientalis. All three were moved to Hypselotriton (Pingia) [that's genus and subgenus]. I went one further, considering the orientalis group to be a full genus, Pingia. I still think that's the case, but Pingia is not the valid name for it, and Hypselotriton can safely be used still.

This is problematical. In even MORE recent studies, the redescribed specimens of Pingia granulosa couldn't be examined, but many new animals from the same area were. Those animals were found to be physically identical to Pingia granulosa. However, they were ALSO found to be juvenile Pachytriton, specifically the slender forms from the pet trade which have long been considered "northeastern labiatus". Examining the original description and illustration, it's obvious that the animals being described were the very same slender Pachytriton. By now it's clear that the spotted pachys are two species in the middle - P.brevipes and P.archospotus, and the two separate populations of brown [usually] pachys are also two species. The name P.labiatus belongs to the southwestern robust ones, while the slender northeastern ones include the animals names as P.granulosus.

Coming back to "problematical"...it's now clear we have four named species of torrent newt. Trouble is, someone has attached the name granulosus to new specimens which are PROBABLY juvenile torrent newts, but no-one else has actually examined them to be sure. The name might be falsely attached to a firebelly newt, and that needs to be confirmed and (if need be) fixed, including a new name for the firebelly (if that's what it is). The lesser remaining issue is that the coastal firebellies (Hypselotriton fudingensis, H.orientalis, H.orphicus, and potentially the so-called "granulosus") are left in need of a new subgenus or genus name, though as cousins of H.wolterstorffi they can continue to share that genus.

Summary:
Pachytriton archospotus
Pachytriton brevipes
Pachytriton granulosus
Pachytriton labiatus
Pachytriton A = P.granulosus
Pachytriton B = P.granulosus
Pachytriton C = Paramesotriton ermizhaoi
Pachytriton D [mine] = Paramesotriton sp.
Pachytriton D [others] = P.archospotus?

Hypselotriton (??) fudingensis
Hypselotriton (??) orientalis
Hypselotriton (??) orphicus
Pingia granulosa [original] = Pachytriton granulosus
"Pingia granulosa" [new] = Pachytriton granulosus or Hypselotriton (??) sp. nov.
 
General chit-chat
Help Users
  • No one is chatting at the moment.
    Chat Bot: Kepuchie has left the room. +1
    Back
    Top