MARQUES ET AL.: AMPHIBIANS AND TERRESTRIAL REPTILES OF ANGOLA 
39 
lack of surveys in many areas of the country, it is expected that the known diversity of both amphib¬ 
ians and reptiles will inerease in the future as new expeditions are earried out. In addition, many 
species occurring in bordering areas of the surrounding eountries are expected to occur in the eoun- 
try (for speeies known to oeeur in the vincinity of the Angolan border and potentially oeeurring 
inside the eountry see, for example, Broadley (1991, 1998), Poynton (1998), and Channing 
(2001)). Further, we are aware of other taxa eonfirmed from Angola on the basis of unpublished 
museum reeords and new eolleetions made by ourselves and eolleagues, but as this atlas is limited 
to speeies noted in the literature, they have been exeluded from this doeument. 
Most speeies (62% for amphibians, 55% for reptiles) are represented by five or fewer locali¬ 
ties in Angola. Few species are known from many localities, with only 9% of the amphibians and 
12% of the reptile taxa being represented by more than 20 loealities in Angola. A total of 678 
unique loealities are known to have amphibian and/or reptile reeords in Angola. The available data 
are distributed unevenly across the eountry. As Table 2 and Fig. 28 highlight, there is a lower 
number of sampled loealities in northwestern (Cabinda, Zaire, Bengo, Luanda and Uige provinees) 
eentral eastern (Lunda Sul and Moxieo provinees), and southeastern Angola (Cuando Cubango 
Provinee), which contrasts with northeastern (Lunda Norte Provinee), eentral (Kwanza Norte, 
Malanje, Bie, Huambo provinees), eentral eoastal (Kwanza Sul Provinee), and espeeially the south¬ 
western areas of the eountry (Benguela, Huila and Namibe provinees), whieh are represented by 
the highest number of sampled loealities for both amphibians and reptiles. 
The differenee in the number of reeords among provinees is explained by both the historieal 
penetration of colonial power in Angola, as well as by the different eontexts of the expeditions that 
were made to the eountry. There is good spatial and taxonomic coverage in the western areas of the 
eountry, espeeially Malanje, Benguela, Huila, and Namibe provinees, whieh are all areas that had 
a strong colonial presence and good eommunieation infrastrueture, and that have been explored by 
a number of naturalists and expeditions from the nineteenth eentury to present day. The northeast 
provinees of the Lundas, espeeially Lunda Norte are reasonably well surveyed, espeeially due to 
the eontributions of the former Biology Laboratory of the Museu do Dundo. Cuando Cubango 
Provinee, whieh was historieally negleeted, had diffieult overland aeeess, and was ealled by the 
former Portuguese eolonials the ''Terras do fun do mundo'' (the “lands of the end of the world”), 
now has reasonably good eoverage, ehiefly due to the expeditions of the Okavango Wilderness 
Table 2. Comparison between the number of Angolan amphibian and reptile taxa and endemies, with 
neighboring eountries. South Afriea is ineluded as it represents both the most biodiverse and well-doeument- 
ed sub-Saharan herpetofauna. Data for non-Angolan amphibians from amphibiaweb.eom; data for reptiles 
from Uri Roll, Shai Meiri and the Global Assessment of Reptile Distributions (GARD) Initiative 
(http://www.gardinitiative.org/) and Bates et al. 2014 (South Afriea only). Angolan data based on full speeies 
with eonfirmed presenee in the eountry and present in the taxonomie aeeounts. 
Angola 
Democratic 
Republic of the 
Congo 
Republic of 
the Congo 
Zambia 
Botswana 
Namibia 
South Africa 
Amphibian species 
117 
225 
75 
87 
36 
60 
129 
Endemic (%) 
18 (15%) 
59 (26%) 
4 (5%) 
2 (2%) 
0 (0%) 
3 (5%) 
64 (51%) 
Reptile species 
278 
373 
197 
226 
171 
268 
421 
Endemic (%) 
33 (12%) 
22 (5%) 
0 (0%) 
3 (1%) 
1(0.5%) 
48 (18%) 
190 (45%) 
Total species 
395 
598 
272 
313 
207 
328 
550 
Total endemics (%) 
51 (13%) 
81 (14%) 
4(1.4%) 
5 (1.6%) 
1 (0.5%) 
51 (16%) 
254 (54%) 
