Ambystoma velasci Dugès, 1888

Common Names

Plateau Tiger Salamander (Liner, 1994, Herpetol. Circ., 23: 9; Frank and Ramus, 1995, Compl. Guide Scient. Common Names Amph. Rept. World: 27; Liner and Casas-Andreu, 2008, Herpetol. Circ., 38: 28).

Alchichica Salamander (Ambystoma subsalsum [no longer recognized]: Liner and Casas-Andreu, 2008, Herpetol. Circ., 38: 28).

Taylor's Salamander (Ambystoma taylori [no longer recognized]: Liner, 1994, Herpetol. Circ., 23: 9; Frank and Ramus, 1995, Compl. Guide Scient. Common Names Amph. Rept. World: 27; Liner and Casas-Andreu, 2008, Herpetol. Circ., 38: 28).

Lake Alchichica Salamander (Ambystoma taylori [no longer recognized: 150]: . Raffaëlli, 2022, Salamanders & Newts of the World: 150).

Distribution

Northwestern Chihuahua south along the eastern slope of the Sierra Madre Occidental and southern Nuevo Leon to Hidalgo in the Sierra Madre Oriental, west to Zacatecas, and south to southwestern Jalisco and into the Transverse Volcanic range of central Mexico east through Hidalgo to montane central Veracruz (municipalities of Perote, Acultzingo, Las Vigas de Ramírez, Villa Aldama, and Acajete) and Puebla (Lago Alchichica).  

Geographic Occurrence

Natural Resident: Mexico

Endemic: Mexico

Comment

 Shaffer and McKnight, 1996, Evolution, 50: 417–43, presented data that suggested that the status of the Mexican species related to Ambystoma tigrinum are controversial and/or unstable, and that some populations of Ambystoma tigrinum velasci are highly distinctive from each other, in some cases being more closely related to other species than to each other. Subsequently, Irschick and Shaffer, 1997, Herpetologica, 53: 30–49, recognized taxonomically Ambystoma velasci as a species distinct from Ambystoma tigrinum (in the sense of including Ambystoma mavortium), although they noted that Ambystoma velasci might not be monophyletic with respect to some of the insular Mexican species of Ambystoma.  Highton, 2000, in Bruce et al., Biol. Plethodontid Salamanders: 221, suggested that populations from Chihuahua, Jalisco, and Mexico, Mexico, likely represented distinct species and that populations currently under the names Ambystoma granulosum, Ambystoma lermaensis, Ambystoma altamirani, and Ambystoma velasci in the region of the state of Mexico might represent another.  Ambystoma subsalsum was resurrected from the synonymy of Ambystoma velasci for populations at low elevations from eastern Durango and Zacatecas (and presumably to Puebla, the site of the type locality) by Webb, 2004, Bull. Maryland Herpetol. Soc., 40: 122–143, where it had been placed by Brandon, Maruska, and Rumph, 1982 "1981", Bull. S. California Acad. Sci., 80: 112. The rationale behind this action is not clear in the original publication (DRF). Raffaëlli, 2007, Les Urodèles du Monde: 83–84, provided a brief account, figure, and map. Dundee and Liner, 1976, Herpetol. Rev., 7: 178, provided a record for Zacatecas, Mexico. Raffaëlli, 2007, Les Urodèles du Monde: 86, provided a brief account (as Ambystoma taylori), figure, and map. Lemos-Espinal and Dixon, 2013, Amphibians and Reptiles of San Luis Potosí: 22–23, provided an account for San Luis Potosí, Mexico. Farr, Lazcano, and Lavín-Murcio, 2013, Herpetol. Rev., 44: 632–633, discussed the absence of Ambystoma in Tamaulipas, northeastern Mexico, and suggested that records along the border of that state in Texas, USA, likely are the result of release bait animals. Raffaëlli, 2013, Urodeles du Monde, 2nd ed.: 95–99, provided brief accounts (as Ambystoma taylori, Ambystoma velasci, and Ambystoma subsalsum), photos, and maps. Lemos-Espinal and Smith, 2015, Check List, 11(1642): 1–11, noted the occurrence of the species in Hidalgo, Mexico. Lemos-Espinal and Dixon, 2016, Amph. Rept. Hidalgo: 328–329, provided a brief account and map for Hidalgo, Mexico. Lemos-Espinal, Smith, and Valdes-Lares, 2019, Amph. Rept. Durango: 87–88, provided a brief account for Durango, Mexico. Percino-Daniel, Gómez Llamas, and Contreras López, 2019, Herpetol. Notes, 12: 351–352, discussed the range and provided an new record from the Sierra de Cacoma, southwestern Jalisco, Mexico. Contreras-Calvario, Soto-Pozos, Castillo Juárez, Calzada-Arciniega, and Parra-Olea, 2021, Herpetol. Notes, 14: 469–473, provided new records from Veracruz, Mexico, and discussed the range. Everson, Gray, Jones, Lawrence, Foley, Sovacool, Kratovil, Hotaling, Hime, Storfer, Parra-Olea, Percino-Daniel, Aguilar-Miguel, O'Neill, Zambrano, Shaffer, and Weisrock, 2021, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 18 (17: e2014719118): 1–10, included this species in their study of molecular evolution and evolution of life histories in the Ambystoma tigrinum complex. And,  Everson, Gray, Jones, Lawrence, Foley, Sovacool, Kratovil, Hotaling, Hime, Storfer, Parra-Olea, Percino-Daniel, Aguilar-Miguel, O'Neill, Zambrano, Shaffer, and Weisrock, 2021, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 18 (17: e2014719118). Supplementary information: Suppl. Inform. p. 3, discussed taxonomy. Morales Garcia, Morales Garcia, Leyte-Manrique, and García Díaz, 2021, Rev. Latinoam. Herpetol., 4: 173–176, reported several localities in the vicinity of Pachuca, Hidalgo, Mexico. Raffaëlli, 2022, Salamanders & Newts of the World: 143–147, provided accounts (as both Ambystoma velasci , Ambystoma subsalsum, and Ambystoma taylori), summarizing systematics (noting that his Ambystoma velasci is likely composed of four species-lineages), life history, population status, and distribution (including a polygon map). Ambystoma subsalsum and Ambystoma taylori are not here recognized (DRF) pending molecular confirmation if there distinctiveness from Ambystoma velasci. Tighe, 2022, Smithson. Contrib. Zool., 654: 8, briefly discussed the primary and secondary types and their peregrinations among institutions. Tepos-Ramírez, Garduño-Fonseca, Peralta-Robles, García-Rubio, and Cervantes Jiménez, 2023, Check List, 19: 269–292, discussed the distribution and conservation status of the species in Queretaro, Mexico.   

External links:

Please note: these links will take you to external websites not affiliated with the American Museum of Natural History. We are not responsible for their content.

• For access to general information see Wikipedia
• For additional sources of general information from other websites search Google
• For access to relevant technical literature search Google Scholar
• For images search CalPhoto Images and Google Images
• To search the NIH genetic sequence database, see GenBank
• For additional information see AmphibiaWeb report
• For information on conservation status and distribution see the IUCN Redlist
• For information on distribution, habitat, and conservation see the Map of Life
• For related information on conservation and images as well as observations see iNaturalist