Acta Herpetologica 14(1): 3-14, 2019 ISSN 1827-9635 (print) © Firenze University Press ISSN 1827-9643 (online) www.fupress.com/ah DOI: 10.13128/Acta_Herpetol-25008 Uzungwa Scarp Nature Forest Reserve: a unique hotspot for reptiles in Tanzania John Valentine Lyakurwa1,2,*, Kim Monroe Howell2, Linus Kasian Munishi1, Anna Christina Treydte1,3 1 Department of Sustainable Agriculture and Biodiversity Ecosystem Management, The Nelson Mandela African Institution of Science and Technology, P.O. Box 447, Arusha, Tanzania 2 Department of Zoology and Wildlife Conservation, University of Dar es Salaam, P.O. Box 35064, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania 3 Agroecology in the Tropics and Subtropics, University of Hohenheim, Stuttgart, Germany * Corresponding author. Email: johnlyakurwa@udsm.ac.tz Submitted on: 2018, 23rd November; revised on: 2019, 10th March; accepted on: 2019, 4th April Editor: Marco Sannolo Abstract. While knowledge of African vertebrate biodiversity has increased dramatically in recent years, the field of herpetology which encompasses many threatened and endemic species, has lagged behind, and many areas have not been adequately explored. Intensive field work was conducted during the rainy season from December 2017 to April 2018 to assess reptile occurrence mostly in previously unexplored areas of the Uzungwa Scarp Nature Forest Reserve (USNFR) which is part of the Udzungwa Mountain ranges in the Eastern Arc Mountains (EAM), and adjacent agri- cultural areas. Bucket pitfall traps, funnel traps, night transects and opportunistic search methods were used to sample reptiles across four zones: in lowland, submontane and montane forests of the USNFR, and in neighboring farmlands. Forty-five reptile species across 14 families were recorded, mostly concentrated on the lowland and submontane for- ests. The number of endemic and threatened species in the USNFR reaches 20 and 14 respectively, and most are found in the submontane forest. Nineteen species were new records for the USNFR, five of them representing range exten- sions. Reptile species richness, abundance and diversity differed significantly across the four zones, except between montane and farmland zones and between lowland and submontane. However, farmland zone was discordant from other zones in terms of species composition. This study adds to the importance of the EAM not only in harbouring large numbers of species but also as an important hotspot for endemic and threatened reptiles. It also calls for proper land-use practices in farms adjacent to protected areas for sustainable conservation of biodiversity. Keywords. Eastern Arc Mountains, Farmland, Elevation, IUCN threatened species. INTRODUCTION In spite of the alarming trends on the loss of species (Lawton and May, 1995; Baillie et al., 2004; Pimm et al., 2014), little has been done to assess patterns of biodi- versity and threats facing reptiles in Africa (Meng et al., 2016). A recent assessment by Meng et al. (2016) shows that 321 reptile species occur in Tanzania, of which about 13% and 28% are threatened with extinction and are endemic, respectively. Most of these highly fragile rep- tile populations are found in the Eastern Arc Mountains (EAM) (Meng et al., 2016; Spawls et al., 2018). The Eastern Arc Mountains have faced a number of threats, with forest fires, agricultural encroachment, fire- wood collection, logging and climate change being the most important ones (Burgess et al., 2002; Newmark, 2002; Ehardt et al., 2005; Menegon and Salvidio, 2005; Meng et al., 2016). The mountains have lost over 70% of forest cover to agriculture within the last six decades (Newmark, 1998; Newmark, 2002; Hall et al., 2009) and 4 John Valentine Lyakurwa et alii currently support a large number of people (Ndangalasi et al., 2007; Platts et al., 2011). The same impacts have been reported from the Uzungwa Scarp Nature For- est Reserve (USNFR) (Zilihona et al., 1998; Menegon and Salvidio, 2005; Rovero et al., 2012), which encom- passes the southern portion of the EAM. This reserve was recently upgraded from “forest reserve” to “nature reserve” category (URT, 2017), calling out for a higher protection status due to its unique biodiversity. Despite this upgrade, information regarding USNFR’s biodiversity is extremely scant. Since some reptile species possess very narrow dis- tributional ranges and depend on highly-specific habitat requirements (Spawls et al., 2004; Meng et al., 2016), they become more vulnerable to the ongoing anthropogenic activities than wide-ranging species. Menegon and Sal- vidio (2005) showed that elevation determined distribu- tion patterns of reptiles in the USNFR and reported most endemic species to be restricted to higher elevations. The same high elevation areas have faced severe agricultural expansion in the USNFR (Zilihona et al., 1998; Ehardt et al., 2005) and little is known on how reptiles utilize the transformed areas. As some of the farms are found on high elevations, the latter generally hosting more endem- ic species compared to lower elevations, these reptile spe- cies might extend to the farms close to the forest edge on the plateau side. While there are several reports on reptiles of the USNFR (e.g., Menegon and Salvidio, 2005; Lyakurwa, 2017), most of these surveys were limited to the south- ern part of the reserve and to our knowledge, no study has ever investigated how reptiles utilize the agricultural areas bordering the USNFR. Since the previous reports examined both amphibians and reptiles simultaneously (except Lyakurwa, 2017), the surveys were limited to methods which could capture both species groups. A project on Uzungwa Scarp hyper-endemic amphibians has revealed a number of new records in the same area, especially with respect to the distribution extension of the hyper-endemic species and of new species of Nec- tophryoides (Tonelli et al., 2017), that were mostly found in the previously unexplored areas, and has emphasized the need for detailed surveys for reptiles. This study focused on assessing reptile occurrence in the least explored areas of the USNFR and adjacent agricultural lands. Our results on how endemic and threatened rep- tiles utilize the USNFR and the nearby areas dominated by human activities can be used for local and long-term conservation planning in this and other protected areas of Tanzania. MATERIALS AND METHODS Study site This study was carried out in the Uzungwa Scarp Nature Forest Reserve (USNFR) and adjacent areas. The USNFR cov- ers the southeastern part of the Udzungwa mountains and lies between 7°39’-7°51’S, and 35°51’-36°02’ E (Ndangalasi, 2005). With an altitudinal range of 300 m.a.s.l to 2,068 m a.s.l it cov- ers a total area of 207 km2 (Shangali et al., 1998; Ndangalasi et al., 2007; URT, 2017). It borders the Chita River to the south, the Kidete River to the north and the Ruaha, Iwolo and Luko- si rivers to the west (Ndangalasi, 2005). Average rainfall in the USNFR is unimodal (from November to May) and ranges from 1,800 mm to 3,000 mm per year (Shangali et al., 1998; Ndan- galasi, 2005). The average temperature varies seasonally and is estimated to range from 15 to 20 °C on the highlands and 19 to 27 °C in the lowlands (Ndangalasi, 2005). The nature reserve is comprised of lowland (< 800 m a.s.l), submontane (700- 1,400 m a.s.l) and montane forests (> 1,400 m a.s.l), with areas of seasonally inundated grasslands and grassland with bushes (Shangali et al., 1998; Zilihona et al., 1988). Data collection Data were collected during day and night for five consecu- tive months in the wet season, from mid-December 2017 to the end of April 2018. Selection of sampling sites was primar- ily based on elevation, vegetation types (Shangali et al., 1998; Zilihona et al., 1998) and land use type. Other factors known to influence reptile abundance and distribution were also consid- ered at each site. These factors included the amount of leaf litter, availability of rotten logs, distance from water bodies and from rock crevices, following Howell (2002) and McDiarmid et al. (2012). The study area was divided into four zones; three inside the USNFR, i.e., lowland forest, submontane forest and mon- tane forest following Shangali et al. (1998) and Zilihona et al. (1998) with some slight modifications. The fourth zone was set in farmlands bordering the USNFR. These farms were located on the plateau side of the reserve (with elevation range similar to that of a montane zone) and were of interest to this study to verify if the observed pattern of endemism in the reserve would extend beyond the protected area. Each zone consisted of three sites (12 sites in total), each with a radius of 1 km, and placed at least 2 km apart. Data collection took place for ten days at each site (alternated between zones to reflect the timing and com- monality of the season between sites throughout the data col- lection period), making a total of 120 days (90 and 30 days in and outside the USNFR, respectively). Several methods (bucket pitfall traps with drift fences, funnel traps, night transects and opportunistic searches) were used following Howell (2002) and McDiarmid et al. (2012) in order to maximize captures. One bucket pitfall trap line (Howell, 2002) consisted of a 55 m long drift fence, eleven 20-L buckets, set at an interval of 5 m and 10 double-ended funnel traps placed alternately between each bucket. Two bucket pitfall trap lines were established at each site, summing up to a total of six trap lines (66 buckets, and 60 5Reptiles of the Uzungwa Scarp and adjacent areas funnels traps) per zone. Trapping was done for eight consecu- tive nights, in which trap monitoring was done immediately following sunrise and late afternoon, following Stanley et al. (1998) and Howell et al. (2012). A total of 176 bucket pitfall trap nights and 160 funnel trap nights were carried at each site leading to 2112 and 1920 bucket pitfall trap nights and funnel trap nights, respectively, for the entire study. In addition, a total of four 50 m night transects were set at each site (total of 48 transects for the entire study), encompass- ing a range of micro-habitats (sensu Menegon et al., 2008). Each transect was located, marked in advance and searched thor- oughly following Lyakurwa (2017). Since pitfall traps and night transects alone cannot adequately sample all species of reptiles, these methods were supplemented by opportunistic searching, during which reptiles were searched for in their possible hiding/ basking places. All reptiles encountered casually or in locations apart from the 12 sampling sites but within the study area were also recorded as opportunistic encounters. Species identification followed Spawls et al. (2018) while threat status followed Meng et al. (2016). Grouping of endemic/near endemic species based on their dependency to the forest followed Burgess et al. (2007). Kruskal Wallis test (Kruskal and Wallis, 1952) with Dunn’s mul- tiple comparisons was used to compare the overall reptile spe- cies abundance in the four zones while diversity was compared using Hutcheson’s t-test (Hutcheson, 1970). Shannon Wiener index was used for species diversity. Species composition among the four zones and between the surveyed sites was compared using the Bray-Curtis similarity index (Legendre, 1998; Greena- cre and Primicerio, 2013). Data were analyzed using R software version 3.5.0 and Paleontological Statistics software (PAST) version 2.17 (Hammer et al., 2001). Statistical significance was considered when P was less than 0.05. Voucher materials were deposited at the Department of Zoology and Wildlife Conserva- tion of the University of Dar es Salaam (Appendix 1). RESULTS A total of 358 individual reptiles were recorded, rep- resenting 45 species in 14 families (Appendix 1). Thirty- three species were found in the USNFR alone, two in farmland alone, and 10 in both (Appendix 1). Seven spe- cies (Kinyongia sp, Trioceros deremensis, Broadleysaurus major, Crotaphopeltis tornieri, Dendroaspis angusticeps, Gonionotophis nyassae and Lycophidion uzungwense) were single observations while three were double observations (Urocotyledon wolterstorffi, Trioceros tempeli and Afroty- phlops nigrocandidus). Most individuals were found on trees (40.3%), understorey (25.5%), underground (9.1%), dead logs (6.6%), rocks (3.3%) and in farmlands, some individuals were found on house walls (0.8%). Among rep- tiles which were found above the ground (n = 177), 52.0% were found at 50-100 cm height, 32.2% between 100-300 cm height, and 15.8 % above 300 cm from the ground. Nineteen species were new records for the USNFR, five of them representing range extensions (Appendix 1) from previously known distributional ranges. This raised the number of species in the USNFR and surround- ing areas to 60 species across 16 families (Table 1 and Appendix 1). We documented that the USNFR harbours about 21% (20 species) of reptiles that are endemic/near endemic to Tanzania (Appendix 1). About 69% of rep- tiles endemic/near endemic to EAM are now confirmed to occur in the USNFR (Appendix 1). A large number of these endemics were chameleons (7 species), a number which is equivalent to 29% of all Tanzanian endemic cha- meleons. The number of species considered as globally threat- ened/ near threatened with extinction (Near Threat- ened, Vulnerable, Endangered or Critically Endangered) reached 14 in the USNFR (Appendix 1), equivalent to 33% of all reported threatened/ near threatened reptile species in Tanzania. Most of these species were found in the submontane forest (Appendix 1; Fig. 1 and 2). Except for Afrotyphlops nigrocandidus, all strictly for- est dependent endemic/ near endemic species were found only in the protected areas of the USNFR (Appendix 1). Similarly, other endemic reptiles were found in areas inside the USNFR with the exception of Trioceros tem- peli and T.werneri which were found both inside and out- side the reserve and Lycophidion uzungwense which was only found outside the reserve (Appendix 1). Outside the USNFR, A. nigrocandidus was found in a farm plot while T. tempeli, T.werneri and L. uzungwense were found in natural forest fragments, in fruit trees (the former two) Table 1. Total number of reptiles species, number of IUCN threat- ened species, per families found in and around USNFR (Sources: Menegon and Salvidio 2005; Lyakurwa 2017, this study). NT = Near threatened, VU = Vulnerable, EN = Endangered Family Total Endemic NT VU EN Agamidae 1 0 0 0 0 Atractaspidae 2 0 0 0 0 Chamaeleonidae 9 7 2 0 1 Colubridae 12 2 1 0 1 Elapidae 2 0 0 0 0 Gekkonidae 8 2 0 2 0 Gerrhosauridae 1 0 0 0 0 Lamprophiidae 3 1 0 0 0 Natricidae 1 0 0 0 0 Psammophiidae 2 0 0 0 0 Pseudoxyrhophiidae 2 0 0 1 0 Pythonidae 1 0 0 0 0 Scincidae 9 2 0 1 1 Typhlopidae 1 1 0 1 0 Varanidae 1 0 0 0 0 Viperidae 5 1 0 3 0 6 John Valentine Lyakurwa et alii Fig. 1. Distribution of endemic, Vulnerable, Near Threatened and Endangered reptile species in the Uzungwa Scarp Nature Forest Reserve and adjacent areas as assessed from December 2017 to April 2018. Low 1,2,3 = Lowland sites, Farm1,2,3 = Farmland sites, Sub1,2,3 = Sub- montane sites, Mon 1,2,3= Montane sites. 7Reptiles of the Uzungwa Scarp and adjacent areas and commercial forests dominated by Cupressus sp. and Pinus sp. Maize and bean fields were poor in reptile spe- cies, with only Philothamnus hoplogaster, Lygodactylus grotei and Trachylepis varia being the common residents. All reptiles observed by Lyakurwa (2017) were also recorded during this study, except for Buhoma procterae, Natriciteres variegata, Python natalensis and Xyelodont- ophis uluguruensis (Appendix 1). Nine species recorded by Menegon and Salvidio (2005) in the same area were not found during this study (Appendix 1). Lycophidion uzungwense, previously found inside the USNFR by Men- egon and Salvido (2005), was only found in a natural forest patch outside the USNFR. These patches, together with commercial forests and fruit trees in agricultural lands, also proved to be important for chameleons (espe- cially Trioceros tempeli and T. werneri) (Fig. 3A). Kinyon- Fig. 2. Mean number of endemic, Near Threaterned (NT), Vulner- able (VU) and Endangered (EN) reptile species in the four surveyed zones of the Uzungwa Scarp Forest Nature Reserve and adjacent agricultural areas. Fig. 3. Some of the reptile species recorded in the USNFR from December 2017 to April 2018. A male Trioceros werneri on a commercial plant outside the USFNR (A), Kinyongia sp (B), Aparallactus sp (C), Cnemaspis sp (D), Male (A) and Female (B) Urocotyledon wolterstorffi. The above Cnemaspis, Aparallactus and Kinyongia could not be identified with certain to species level using Spawls et al. (2018). 8 John Valentine Lyakurwa et alii gia sp (Fig. 3B) is believed to be a new species similar to Kinyongia fischeri based on morphological grounds. Similarly, Aparallactus sp (Fig. 3C) needs further studies as the currently available identification key by Spawls et al. (2018) was not sufficient to identify it to species level. The genera Lygodactylus, Cnemaspis (Fig. 3D) and Uro- cotyledon (Fig. 3E and 3F) encompass individuals with highly varying morphology and our findings likely repre- sent more than one cryptic species in these genera. Lowland and submontane forests contained a simi- lar number of species, which decreased more than half towards montane forest and farmlands (Appendix 1). Overall reptile abundance differed significantly across the zones (H = 18.187, P = 0.0004). Further analysis using Dunn’s multiple comparison showed no significant differ- ence between farmland and montane forest and between lowland and submontane forests (Table 2). All other pairs were significantly different in overall reptile abun- dance (Table 2). However, Bray-Curtis similarity index showed farmland to be the most discordant zone (Fig. 4), with lowland and submontane zones being more simi- lar in species composition. Lowland, submontane and montane zones contained more forest dependent species than farmland zone (Appendix 1). Sites in the farmland zone were very similar in species composition than when compared with sites in the protected area (Appendix 2). Also, sites close to each other were more similar in spe- cies composition than distant sites, whereby some distant sites showed complete dissimilarity (Appendix 2). Species Table 2. Dunn’s multiple comparison of overall reptile abundance in the four sampled zones of the USNFR and surrounding areas Comparison P value Farmland vs Lowland 0.001 Farmland vs Montane 0.467 Farmland vs Submontane 0.004 Lowland vs Montane 0.001 Lowland vs Submontane 0.281 Montane vs Submontane 0.003 Fig. 4. Similarity cluster among the four zones of the Uzungwa Scarp Nature Forest Reserve and adjacent areas based on Bray-Cur- tis similarity index (Single Average Link) as per the current study. Table 3. Hutchesons’ t test summary of species diversity for the four surveyed zones of the USNFR and the surrounding areas. Comparison t value DF P value Farmland vs Lowland 8.854 181 <0.001 Farmland vs Montane 1.678 124 0.096 Farmland vs Submontane 8.148 179 <0.001 Lowland vs Montane 5.971 98 <0.001 Lowland vs Submontane 0.912 196 0.363 Montane vs Submontane 5.324 97 <0.001 Table 4. Species richness, diversity and Chao richness estimator (±SE) for the four sampled zones   Lowland Submontane Montane Farmland Species observed 26 24 9 11 Chao Estimator 32.17±5.13 43.97±17.26 9.98±2.22 17.19±7.48 Shannon diversity 2.23 2.16 1.17 0.79 Fig. 5. Rarefaction curves for species recorded in the four sampled zones of the USNFR and surrounding areas from December 2017 to April 2018. Farm= Farmland (circle), Low=Lowland (triangle), Mon=Montane (square), Sub=Submontane (plus sign). Shaded region surrounding each line represent 95 % confidence levels 9Reptiles of the Uzungwa Scarp and adjacent areas diversity in lowland and submontane was significantly higher than farmland and montane (Table 3). However, species rarefaction curves for the zones did not reach an asymptote (Fig. 5). The mean (±SE) number of species for Chao estimator was higher than the observed species in all zones (Table 4). DISCUSSION With our study, we were able to almost double the number of reptile species for the USNFR, from 33 species (Menegon and Salvidio, 2005) and 38 species (Lyakurwa, 2017) to 60 species. Such a result pinpoints the Udzung- wa mountains as biologically the richest mountain block in the EAM in terms of herpetofauna, harboring the highest number of endemic and near endemic reptile species (34), followed by East Usambara (32), Uluguru (29) and Nguru (19) (Burgess et al., 2007). Previously, in terms of herpetofauna, this mountain range was ranked after Usambara and Uluguru mountains (Howell, 1993; Burgess et al., 2007). Three species out of the nine clas- sified as globally threatened, endemic to Tanzania and climate change-vulnerable by Meng et al. (2016), are now confirmed to occur in the USNFR. This result high- lights the importance of protecting these mountains and calls out for more long-term surveys in other parts of the Udzungwa and the EAM. Although faunal surveys are recognized as one of the most critical steps in assessing forest biodiversity (Stan- ley et al., 1998), little attention has been given to Afri- can herpetology (Spawls et al., 2004; Largen and Spawls, 2010; Meng et al., 2016; Tolley et al., 2016). There are many areas in East Africa which are yet to be explored in a herpetological context (Spawls et al., 2004) and this study shows the need for detailed surveys even in previ- ously visited areas, supporting Howell (1993) and Spawls et al. (2004), who showed the possibility of getting new records in most areas of East Africa, due to lack of inten- sive surveys in most parts of the region. The overall shortage of information adds more risk to the conserva- tion of African biodiversity (Tolley et al., 2016), particu- larly herpetofauna and may lead to misallocated conser- vation priorities (Pimm et al., 2014), especially in a biodi- versity hotspot country like Tanzania. Contrary to previous studies, we found that most endemic, near endemic and IUCN threatened species were concentrated in the submontane forest of the USN- FR. Menegon and Salvidio (2005) and Menegon et al. (2008) reported that the number of endemic and near endemic reptile species increases with altitude. Similarly, Burgess et al. (2002) reported more endemic vertebrates in montane forests of the EAM and fewer in lowland, submontane and upper montane forests. A large num- ber of endemic and threatened species in the submon- tane forest areas might be due to the intermediate envi- ronmental conditions in the mid-elevation zones, which accommodate both high and low elevation specialists (McCain, 2010). However, the same zone has suffered from severe forest loss in recent years (Burgess et al., 2002) and it is not clear how this has been affecting rep- tiles. We hope that the recent upgrading of the protection status of the reserve will reduce the destruction activities that have been going on in submontane forests. Farmland zone had fewer forest dependent species compared to other zones which agree with Burgess et al. (2007) who reported most EAM endemic species as spe- cialists of dense forests. Our findings also highlight how the type of farming (e.g commercial tree plantation and some natural vegetation around/in the farm plots) might influence reptile assemblage and shows the potential of the farms surrounding the USNFR in buffering the mon- tane forests. Some strictly forest-dependent species were found at the forest edge and can act as important indi- cators of ecosystem health following more studies. There- fore, land-use planning is highly important, particularly in the farmlands as the endemic species were found mainly in natural forest patches, fruit trees and com- mercial tree plantations near the USNFR, of which the species might decline in the future without proper land management. While we have gathered data on reptiles from many more sites and over a prolonged period in the wet season compared to any other study in the Udzungwa moun- tains, there is still a need for subsequent surveys in the area, both in the dry and wet seasons. This is especially important, as the current species accumulation curves have not yet reached an asymptote showing the possi- bilities of getting new records. Some reptile species are highly secretive, have low population densities and/or are locally distributed (Spawls et al., 2004; Meng et al., 2016), making it possible to miss them when sampling only in one season. Since we found only a few reptiles (especially chameleons in the genus Trioceros) more than 10 m high, we recommend more efforts on sampling canopy dwell- ers (e.g., use of arboreal traps in future studies). Similarly, sampling all zones simultaneously might provide more meaningful data, which, was not possible in our study due to logistical constraints. Three to five years of con- secutive trapping (McDiarmid et al., 2012) across various seasons (Stanley, 1998; Howell, 2002) has been recom- mended in order to increase the probability of recording rare species. Subsequent surveys will also enable docu- menting species that this study failed, adding to the con- 10 John Valentine Lyakurwa et alii servation value of not only the USNFR and Udzungwa mountains but the entire EAM region. This article has shown the importance of re-assessing the herpetofauna of EAM, and adds to the importance of conserving these mountains. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT We would like to thank WWCT and WWF (Prince Bernhard scheme) for the financial supports, TFS, and the USNFR management (especially Yusuph Tango and Renatus Msabo) for issuing research per- mits (TFS/SHZ/USNR/281/402/01/10/ TFS/SHZ/ USNR/281/402/01/10/54). We are grateful to our field assistants Abdala Chiponda, Magnus Kahise, Ngwabi Moto, Michael Mpwage, Dan Kinyele, Ronald Nganyori and various porters for their help. Additional advice was given by Elena Tonelli, Simon Loader and Andy Bowkett on the study design. We also acknowledge village govern- ment officers and villagers from all villages surrounding the USNFR for their generosity. In addition, we thank Stephen Spawls and Michele Menegon for sharing some of their unpublished materials and support in identifica- tion of some species. REFERENCES Baillie, J.E.M., Hilton-Taylor, C., Stuart, S.N. (2004): IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. A Global Spe- cies Assessment. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cam- bridge. Burgess, N., Doggart, N., Lovett, J.C. (2002): The Uluguru Mountains of eastern Tanzania: the effect of forest loss on biodiversity. Oryx 36: 140-152 Burgess, N.D., Butynski, T.M., Cordeiro, N.J., Doggart, N., Fjeldsa, J., Howell, K.M., Kilahama F., Loader, S.P., Lovett, J.C., Menegon, M., Moyer, D.C., Nashanda, E., Perkin, A., Rovero, F., Stanley, W.T., Stuart, S.N. ( 2007): The biological importance of the Eastern Arc Mountains of Tanzania and Kenya. Biol. Conserv. 134: 209-231. Ehardt, C.L., Jones, T.P., Butynski, T.M. (2005): Protective status, ecology and strategies for improving conserva- tion of Cercocebus sanjei in the Udzungwa Mountains, Tanzania. Int. J. Primatol. 26: 557-583. Hall, J., Burgess, N.D., Lovett, J., Mbilinyi., B., Gereau, R.E. (2009): Conservation implications of deforesta- tion across an elevational gradient in the Eastern Arc Mountains, Tanzania. Biol. Conserv. 142: 2510-2521. Hammer, O., Harper, D.A.T., Ryan, P.D. (2001): PAST: Paleontological Statistics software package for educa- tion and data analysis. Palaeontol. Electron. 4: 9. Howell, K.M. (1993): Herpetofauna of the eastern African rainforests. In: Biogeography and ecology of the rainfor- ests of eastern Africa, pp. 173-202. Lovett, J.C., Wasser, S.K., Eds, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. Howell, K.M., Msuya, C.A., Mligo, C., Werema, C., Kihaule, P., Honorati, M.K., Suleiman, H.O. (2012): Biodiversity surveys of poorly known coastal forests of southeastern Tanzania and Zanzibar. A consultan- cy report of the Department of Zoology and Wildlife Conservation to WWF Tanzania. Howell, K.M. (2002): Amphibians and reptiles: the herp- tiles, In: Davies G., Ed, African forest Biodiversity, a field survey manual for vertebrates, Earthwatch. Hutcheson, K. (1970): A test for comparing diversities based on the Shannon formula. J. Theor. Biol. 29: 151- 154. Kruskal, W.H., Wallis, W.A. (1952): Use of ranks in one- criterion analysis of variance. 1. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 47: 583-621. Largen, M., Spawls, S. (2010): The amphibians and rep- tiles of Ethiopia and Erithrea. Chimaira Lawton, J.H., May, R.M. (1995): Extinction rates. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK. Lyakurwa, J.V. (2017): The reptiles of the Uzungwa Scarp Forest Reserve (USFR): an updated checklist with notes on Dagger-tooth Vine snake Xyelodontophis ulu- guruensis. J. East Afr. Nat. Hist. 106: 57-65. Maritz, B., Alexander, G.J. (2007): Herpetofaunal utilisa- tion of riparian buffer zones in an agricultural land- scape near Mtunzini, South Africa. African J. Herpe- tol. 56(2): 163-169. Masterson, G.P.R., Maritz, B., Mackay, D., Alexander, G.J. (2009): The impacts of past cultivation on the reptiles in a South African grassland. African J. Herpetol. 58: 71-84. McDiarmid, R.W., Foster, M.S., Guyer, C., Gibbons, W., Chernoff, N. (2012): Reptile biodiversity, standard methods for inventory and monitoring. University of California press Menegon, M., Salvidio, S. (2005): Amphibian and rep- tile diversity in the southern Uzungwa Scarp Forest Reserve, south-eastern Tanzania. African biodiversi- ty: molecules, organisms, ecosystems. Proceedings of the 5th International Symposium on Tropical Biology, Museum Koenig, Bonn. Menegon, M., Doggart, N., Owen, N. (2008): The Nguru mountains of Tanzania, an outstanding hotspot of herpetofaunal diversity. Acta Herpetol. 3: 107-127. Meng, H., Carr, J., Beraducci, J., Bowles, P., Branch, W.R., Capitani, C., Chenga, J., Cox, N., Howell, K., Malonza, 11Reptiles of the Uzungwa Scarp and adjacent areas P., Marchant, R., Mbilinyi, B., Mukama, K., Msuya, C., Platts, P.J., Safari, I., Spawls, S., Shennan-Farpon, Y., Wagner, P., Burgess, N.D. (2016): Tanzania’s reptile biodiversity: distribution, threats and climate change vulnerability. Biol. Conserv. 204: 72-82. Ndangalasi, H.J. (2005): Implications of Utilization of Non-timber Forest products in Mountain Ecosys- tems: A case study of Uzungwa Scarp and Njerera Forest Reserves, Tanzania. Unpublished doctoral dis- sertation, Department of Botany, University of Dar es Salaam. Ndangalasi, H.J., Bitariho, R., Dovie, D.B.K. (2007): Har- vesting of non-timber forest products and implica- tions for conservation in two montane forests of East Africa. Biol. Conserv. 134: 242-250. Newmark, W.D (1998): Forest area, fragmentation, and loss in the Eastern Arc Mountains: implications for the conservation of Biological diversity. J. East Afr. Nat. Hist. 87: 29-36. Newmark, W.D. (2002): Conserving biodiversity in East African Forests: A study of the Eastern Arc Moun- tains. Ecological studies 155. Springer Pimm, S.L., Jenkins, C.N., Abell, R., Brooks, T.M., Git- tleman, J.L., Joppa, L.N., Raven, P.H., Roberts, C.M., Sexton, J.O. (2014): The biodiversity of species and their rates of extinction, distribution, and protection. Science 344: 1246752. Platts, P.J., Burgess, N.D., Gereau, R.E., Lovett, J.C., Mar- shall, A.R., McClean, C.J., Pellikka, P.K.E., Swetnam, R.D., Marchant, R. (2011): Delimiting tropical moun- tain ecoregions for conservation. Environ. Conserv. 38: 312-324. R Core Team. (2018): R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. URL https://www.R-pro- ject.org/. Rovero, F., Mtui, A.S., Kitegile, A.S., Nielsen, M.R. (2012): Hunting or habitat degradation? Decline of primate populations in Udzungwa Mountains, Tanzania: An analysis of threats. Biol. Conserv. 146: 89-96. Shangali, C.F., Mabula, C.K., Mmari, C. (1998): Biodiver- sity and human activities in the Udzungwa mountain forests, Tanzania. Ethnobotanical survey in the Uzung- wa scarp forest reserve. Afr. Nat. Hist. 87: 391-318. Spawls, S., Howell, K., Hinkel, H., Menegon, M. (2018): Field guide to East African reptiles. Bloomsbury. Spawls, S., Howell, K.M., Drewes, R.C., Ashe, J. (2004): Field Guide to the Reptiles of East Africa. A and C Black, London. Stanley, W.T., Kihaule, P.M, Howell K.M., Hutterer, R. (1988): Small mammals of the Eastern Arc Moun- tains, Tanzania. Afr. Nat. Hist. 87: 91-100. Tolley, K.A., Alexander, G.J., Branch, W.R., Bowles, P., Maritz, B. (2016): Conservation status and threats for African reptiles. Biol. Conserv. 204: 63-71. Tonelli, E., Bowkett, A.E., Menegon, M., Harris E.D., Marsden, S.J. (2017): Conserving hyper-endemic Uzungwa restricted amphibians. TAWIRI Conference Proceedings, Arusha, Tanzania. URT (United Republic of Tanzania) (2017): Uzungwa Scarp Nature Forest Reserve Management Plan, Min- istry of natural resources and tourism. Zilihona, I., Shangali, C., Mabula, C.K., Hamisy, C. (1998): Human activities threatening the Biodiversity of Uzungwa scarp forest reserve-Tanzania. Afr. Nat. Hist. 87: 319-326. 12 John Valentine Lyakurwa et alii APPENDICES Appendix 1. Reptile species, threat category, and endemism per families recorded in Uzungwa Scarp Nature Forest Reserve and surround- ing areas. Note; * = species that were recorded by Menegon and Salvidio 2005, ᵠ = recorded by Menegon and Salvidio but not surely in USFNR (either from general bibliography or from surrounding villages); ‡ = collected by Lyakurwa 2017 and not found by this study, Y = endemic, f = forest visitor, F= mainly forest, FF= strictly confined to forest. Species Voucher Low- land Sub- mon- tane Mon- tane Farm- land Threat category Forest depend- ency Endemic/ Near endemic Agamidae Agama mossambica Peters, 1854 X LC Chamaeleonidae Kinyongia sp JVL 1709 X NT FF Y Kinyongia oxyrhina (Klaver & Böhme, 1988) X X NT FF Y Rhampholeon moyeri Menegon, Salvidio & Tilbury, 2002 X X LC FF Y Rieppeleon brevicaudatus (Matschie, 1892) X X LC Trioceros deremensis (Matschie, 1892) JVL 1718 X LC FF Y Trioceros laterispinis (Loveridge, 1932) ᵠ EN F Y Trioceros tempeli (Tornier, 1899) X X LC F Y Trioceros werneri (Tornier, 1899) X X LC F Y GEKKONIDAE Cnemaspis cf dickersonae (Schmidt, 1919) JVL 1735, JVL 1733, JVL 1733 X LC Cnemaspis uzungwae Perret, 1986 JVL 1712 X X VU FF Y Hemidactylus mabouia (Moreau de Jonnès, 1818) JVL 1724 X LC Hemidactylus platycephalus Peters, 1854 JVL 1725 X LC Hemidactylus sp JVL 1723 X Lygodactylus capensis (Smith, 1849) X X LC Lygodactylus cf angularis Günther, 1893 JVL 1701, X X X LC Lygodactylus grotei Sternfeld, 1911 X X LC Urocotyledon wolterstorffi (Tornier, 1900) JVL 1737, JVL 1722 X X VU FF Y Gerrhosauridae Broadleysaurus major (Duméril, 1851) JVL 1727 X LC Opportunistic in lowland farms Scincidae Leptosiaphos kilimensis (Stejneger, 1891) JVL 1707, JVL 1706 X LC Melanoseps loveridgei Brygoo & Roux-Estève, 1982 * LC Melanoseps uzungwensis Loveridge, 1942 JVL 1710, JVL 1711, JVL 1731, JVL 1732, JVL 1731, JVL 1732 X X EN FF Y Mochlus afer (Peters, 1854) JVL 1715, JVL 1716 X LC Mochlus sp JVL 1719 X Scelotes uluguruensis Barbour & Loveridge, 1928 * VU FF Y Trachylepis maculilabris (Gray, 1845) JVL 1719 X X LC Trachylepis striata (Peters, 1844) X LC Trachylepis varia (Peters, 1867) X X X LC Varanidae Varanus niloticus (Linnaeus, 1766) X LC Atractaspidae Aparallactus sp JVL 1729, JVL 1721 X X Atractaspis aterrima Günther, 1863 JVL 1708, JVL 1720 X X LC 13Reptiles of the Uzungwa Scarp and adjacent areas Species Voucher Low- land Sub- mon- tane Mon- tane Farm- land Threat category Forest depend- ency Endemic/ Near endemic Colubridae Boaedon fuliginosus (Boie, 1827) X X X LC Crotaphopeltis tornieri (Werner, 1908) X LC FF Y Dasypeltis medici Bianconi, 1859 * LC Dipsadoboa werneri (Boulenger, 1897) * NT FF Y Philothamnus hoplogaster (Günther, 1863) JVL 1703 X X X X LC Philothamnus macrops (Boulenger, 1895) X X LC F Y Philothamnus punctatus Peters, 1867 X LC Philothamnus semivariegatus (Smith, 1840) ᵠ LC Telescopus semiannulatus Smith, 1849 X LC Thelotornis kirtlandii (Hallowell, 1844) * LC Thelotornis mossambicanus (Bocage, 1895) X X LC Xyelodontophis uluguruensis Broadley & Wallach, 2002 ‡ EN FF Y Elapidae Dendroaspis angusticeps (Smith, 1849) X LC Naja cf melanoleuca Hallowell, 1857 X X LC Lamprophiidae Gonionotophis nyassae (Günther, 1888) JVL 1724 X LC Lycodonomorphus whytii (Boulenger, 1897) JVL 1713 X X LC Lycophidion uzungwense Loveridge, 1932 X LC F Y Natricidae Natriciteres variegata (PETERS, 1861) Ϯ LC Psammophiidae Psammophis tanganicus Loveridge, 1940 X LC Psammophylax variabilis Günther, 1893 JVL 1704, JVL 1705 X X LC Pseudoxyrhophiidae Buhoma procterae (Loveridge, 1922) Ϯ VU FF Y Duberria lutrix (Linnaeus, 1758) X LC Pythonidae Python natalensis Smith, 1840 ‡ LC Typhlopidae Afrotyphlops nigrocandidus (Broadley & Wallach, 2000) JVL 1702 X X VU FF Y Viperidae Atheris barbouri Loveridge, 1930 ᵠ VU F Y Atheris ceratophora Werner, 1896 X X VU F Y Bitis arietans Merrem, 1820 ᵠ LC Bitis gabonica Duméril, Bibron & Duméril, 1854 ᵠ VU Causus defilippii (Jan, 1863) ᵠ LC 14 John Valentine Lyakurwa et alii Appendix 2. Bray-Curtis species similarity index summary for the 12 sites surveyed in the Uzungwa Scarp Nature Forest Reserve and adja- cent areas from December 2017 to April 2018. Note; 0 represents no similarity (100% dissimilarity) while 1 represents 100% similarity. Low=Lowland, Sub = Submontane, Mon= Montane, Farm= Farmland. Numbers in bold indicate more strongly related sites (>50%) while those italicized indicate 100% dissimilarity. Farm 1 Farm 2 Farm 3 Mon 1 Mon 2 Mon 3 Sub 1 Sub 2 Sub 3 Low 1 Low 2 Farm 2 0.5634 Farm 3 0.8400 0.6575 Mon 1 0.0625 0.0364 0.0588 Mon 2 0.1951 0.2813 0.1861 0.3200 Mon 3 0.0377 0.0264 0.0364 0.2703 0.3044 Sub 1 0.0364 0.0513 0.0351 0.2051 0.2083 0.4333 Sub 2 0.0615 0.0000 0.0000 0.0408 0.0000 0.0286 0.2222 Sub 3 0.1200 0.0882 0.0769 0.2353 0.2791 0.2182 0.5263 0.2887 Low 1 0.0377 0.1316 0.0364 0.0541 0.0435 0.0345 0.0333 0.1714 0.1091 Low 2 0.0526 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.2169 0.5591 0.2308 0.2716 Low 3 0.1000 0.0317 0.0952 0.0833 0.0606 0.0444 0.1277 0.1053 0.0952 0.2667 0.1765 Acta Herpetologica Vol. 14, n. 1 - June 2019 Firenze University Press Uzungwa Scarp Nature Forest Reserve: a unique hotspot for reptiles in Tanzania John Valentine Lyakurwa1,2,*, Kim Monroe Howell2, Linus Kasian Munishi1, Anna Christina Treydte1,3 Experience of predacious cues and accessibility to refuge minimize mortality of Hylarana temporalis tadpoles Santosh Mogali*, Bhagyashri Shanbhag, Srinivas Saidapur Tonal calls as a bioacoustic novelty in two Atlantic Forest species of Physalaemus (Anura: Leptodactylidae) Thiago R. de Carvalho1,*, Célio F.B. Haddad1, Marcos Gridi-Papp2 Scientific publication of georeferenced molecular data as an adequate guide to delimit the range of Korean Hynobius salamanders through citizen science Amaël Borzée1,*, Hae Jun Baek2,3, Chang Hoon Lee2,3, Dong Yoon Kim2, Jae-Young Song4, Jae- Hwa Suh5, Yikweon Jang1, Mi-Sook Min2* Mirrored images but not silicone models trigger aggressive responses in male Common wall lizards Stefano Scali1,*, Roberto Sacchi2, Mattia Falaschi1,3, Alan J. Coladonato2, Sara Pozzi2, Marco A.L. Zuffi4, Marco Mangiacotti1,2 Using an in-situ infra-red camera system for sea turtle hatchling emergence monitoring Fatima N. Oğul1,#,*, Franziska Huber2,#, Sinem Cih1, Kumsal Düzgün3, Ahmet E. Kideyş1, Korhan Özkan1 Descriptive osteology of an imperiled amphibian, the Luristan newt (Neurergus kaiseri, Amphibia: Salamandridae) Hadi Khoshnamvand1, Mansoureh Malekian1,*, Yazdan Keivany1, Mazaher Zamani-Faradonbe1, Mohsen Amiri2 Does color polymorphism affect the predation risk on Phalotris lemniscatus (Duméril, Bibron and Duméril, 1854) (Serpentes, Dipsadidae)? Fernanda R. de Avila1,2,*, Juliano M. Oliveira3, Mateus de Oliveira1, Marcio Borges-Martins4, Victor Hugo Valiati2, Alexandro M. Tozetti1 Age structure of a population of Discoglossus scovazzi Camerano, 1878 (Anura - Discoglossidae) in extreme environmental conditions (High Atlas, Morocco) Mohamed Amine Samlali, Abderrahim S’khifa, Tahar Slimani*