Zoosyst. Evol. 99 (1) 2022, 101-116 | DOI 10.3897/zse.99.90181 yee BERLIN Filling the gap: Noteworthy herpetological discoveries in North West Province, South Africa Krystal A. Tolley, Nicolas S. Telford’, Buyisile G. Makhubo®, R. John Power*, Graham J. Alexander South African National Biodiversity Institute, Private Bag X7 Claremont, Cape Town, South Africa School of Animal, Plant and Environmental Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, P.O. Wits, 2050 Johannesburg, South Africa School of Life Sciences, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Private Bag X54001 Durban, 4000, South Africa Biodiversity Management, Department of Economic Development, Environment, Conservation and Tourism, North West Provincial Government, Mmabatho, South Africa f~ t2F “RS https://zoobank. org/DB6F 3 16A-08E.9-40BD-AE14-7735CBE9DCSE Corresponding author: Krystal A. Tolley (k.tolley@sanbi.org.za) Academic editor: Johannes Penner @ Received 10 July 2022 # Accepted 12 October 2022 @ Published 26 January 2023 Abstract The North West Province, South Africa, is centrally situated in southern Africa and is characterised by savannah with a mesic, tem- perate climate in the east and a hot, arid climate in the west. While the eastern region 1s fairly well-documented for herpetofauna, the arid central and western regions are poorly surveyed. Given that the Province has been targeted by the national government for de- velopment of infrastructure, the overall deficiency of biodiversity data could result in impact assessments that are not well-informed. We, therefore, carried out herpetofaunal surveys over two years (2019-2020) in the North West Province to improve knowledge on the distributions of reptiles and amphibians. Our surveys added a total of 578 new records to an earlier baseline of 1340 records. In addition, over 300 records were added to a citizen-science platform in connection with our surveys. As compared to the previous 100 years, our surveys increased the herpetofaunal dataset by 68% in just two years, increased geographic coverage by 20% and brought the total number of species with accurate records for the Province to 102 reptiles and 23 amphibians. We also recorded range exten- sions for five reptile species and confirmed the presence of Dendroaspis polylepis (Black Mamba) in the west where it had been last recorded in 1996. Our surveys resulted in a significant increase in biodiversity data for the Province and provided a better foundation for spatial planning that accounts for biodiversity and the maintenance of ecological function. Key Words Africa, amphibians, barcoding, biogeography, conservation, reptiles, spatial planning, species richness, surveys Introduction et al. 2004; Measey et al. 2019). There have been two comprehensive atlassing projects for herpetofauna of the region (South Africa, Eswatini and Lesotho), which have greatly improved knowledge on species ecology and South A frica has a rich and diverse herpetofauna compris- ing approximately 33% of the reptile species and 11% of the amphibian species known from sub-Saharan Africa. These species assemblages include 401 native, extant (non-marine) reptile species of which 52% are endemic or near-endemic to the country (> 90% of their range in South Africa; Tolley et al. 2019) and 131 amphibians of which 63% are strictly endemic to South Africa (Minter distributions (see Minter et al. 2004; Bates et al. 2014). Thus, compared to other parts of Africa, the herpeto- fauna of South Africa are well-documented in terms of distribution, endemism and richness patterns (see Tolley et al. 2016). These data show that the highest species richness in South Africa is centred in the north-eastern Copyright Tolley, K.A. et a/. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. 102 and south-western parts of the country, possibly due to topographic heterogeneity that provides varied habitats in both climate and substrate (Alexander et al. 2004) and that South African endemics are clustered in the south- west (see Minter et al. 2004; Alexander and Marais 2007). Despite the relatively comprehensive herpetofaunal knowledge, there are several geographic areas in South Africa that stand out for their paucity of herpetological records (see Branch 2014). Noteworthy in this regard are the central and northern Karoo of the Western and North- ern Cape Provinces (Holness et al. 2016; Telford et al. 2022), the central Eastern Cape Province and the western North West Province (see Bates et al. 2014). The scarcity of occurrence records from these parts of the country has resulted in a perception that they have relatively low spe- cies richness, particularly for reptiles (see Branch 2014). Of these areas, the North West Province has undergone significant habitat transformation (Fig. 1) primarily due to pastoral activities throughout the Province, with min- ing and urban expansion affecting the eastern parts of the Province (North West Department of Rural, Environment and Agricultural Development (READ) 2015; Skowno et al. 2021). Much of the western extent of the Province consists of arid Kalahari habitat which is comparative- ly intact, given the climate cannot support high densities of grazing ungulates, whether game or livestock (Fig. 1) and, thus, limits intensive farming activities. Therefore, the combined effect of comparatively few data and heavy habitat transformation across large parts of North West Province imperils the biodiversity of the Province. The elevated risk to biodiversity is particularly ger- mane given that the North West Province Development Plan — 2030 (North West Department of Rural, Environ- ment and Agricultural Development (READ) 2015) and the South African National Development Plan (National Planning Commission 2012) call for the expansion of hu- man settlements and the accompanying development of road, rail, water and electrical transmission infrastructure to support the projected increase in human population. These plans highlight the need for spatial planning to sup- port appropriate land use decision-making, while the ‘bio- diversity sector plan’ for the Province further indicates that spatial planning must be informed by foundational biodiversity data (North West Department of Rural, En- vironment and Agricultural Development (READ) 2015). Undeniably, ensuring service delivery for the urban and rural population does not consist only of augmenting man-made infrastructure, but also depends on preserving natural areas to retain their ecological function (North West Department of Rural, Environment and Agricultural Development (READ) 2015). Given that ecological ser- vices cannot be emulated artificially, protection of natural ecosystems is paramount. Effective spatial planning and mapping of critical bio- diversity areas must be based on underlying biological information, such as data on vegetation type, freshwater features and species occurrence records. While there is some existing knowledge on certain of these biological zse.pensoft.net Tolley, K.A. et al.: Herpetological discoveries in North West Province and environmental traits, the Province is not well sur- veyed for species occurrence, particularly for reptiles and amphibians (see Minter et al. 2004; Bates et al. 2014). Occurrence data for these taxa are needed to update the Province’s biodiversity sector plan (see North West De- partment of Rural, Environment and Agricultural Devel- opment (READ) 2015), yet there have previously been no targeted surveys to generate the required data. Data from existing atlas projects (Minter et al. 2004; Bates et al. 2014), show that the majority of records from the Province are from the eastern parts, leaving the central and west comparatively under-sampled. Although some herpetofaunal records exist for the Province on publicly accessible databases (e.g. Minter et al. 2004; Bates et al. 2014; 1Naturalist, ReptileMap and FrogMap — http://adu. org.za/), many of these records originate from historical collections and lack accuracy. However, these databases are the mainstay for biodiversity practitioners and spatial planners. Essentially, much of the readily available data are too coarse for the precise distribution mapping need- ed for land-use planning. Furthermore, a significant num- ber of the records in the atlassing datasets are duplicates (original museum records are repeated in the published literature and then were logged as separate records), giv- ing an inflated estimate of the number of unique records. Overall, current knowledge suggests that species rich- ness is highest along the eastern margin of the North West Province (Alexander and Marais 2007; Power and Verburgt 2014). However, the estimated richness can be biased by areas where sampling effort has been greatest (see Branch 2014) and the mapped richness pattern may, thus, be the result of uneven sampling rather than actual differences in species richness (e.g. Tolley et al. 2016). The North West Province is at the interface of sub-trop- ical environments extending from the north, as well as arid Kalahari environments to the west and mesic/tem- perate habitats from the east and south (Fig. 1). Much of the Province is covered by savannah and this biome is typically sub-divided into the Eastern Kalahari Bushveld and the Central Bushveld bioregions, with the grassland biome/ecoregion covering the south-eastern extent of the Province (fig. 1 in Power and Olivier 2019). There is a strong east-west climatic gradient across the Province, with a mesic, temperate climate in the east and a hot, arid climate in the west (fig. 1 in Mucina and Rutherford 2006; Cole et al. 2021) and these environmental factors could be influential in driving species richness patterns. Given that the Province is poorly surveyed for reptiles and amphibians, it is possible that the geographic ranges of some species have been underestimated and this would affect species richness estimates. To improve knowledge of herpetofaunal diversity for North West Province, we carried out targeted surveys in the most poorly sampled regions of the Province, identi- fied through interrogation of the historical data available on public databases. Using our new data, together with publicly available data of sufficient quality, we improved the quality of the species richness maps, record range ex- Zoosyst. Evol. 99 (1) 2022, 101-116 ut North West ty Province 22.0 23.0 24.0 25.0 26.0 27.0 28.0 29.0 103 Temperature (° C) Mis 22.0 23.0 24.0 25.0 26.0 27.0 28.0 Figure 1. a. Location of North West Province, South Africa; b. Ecoregions (orange: western arid Kalahari, yellow: southern High- veld grassland, green: eastern mesic Bushveld, superimposed by the degree of habitat transformation as of 2019 (grey); c. Average temperature of warmest quarter (°C; bio10); d. Annual precipitation (mm/year; bio12). Environmental data from CHELSA (http:// chelsa-climate.org/) and land cover data from South African Department of Forestry, Fisheries and Environment (https://egis.envi- ronment.gov.za/sa_ national land cover datasets). Polygons within South Africa show provincial borders. tensions and generated a more comprehensive species list for the Province. We also provide new, publicly accessi- ble data for North West Province which can be used for spatial planning. Materials and methods A pre-survey herpetofaunal dataset was assembled by gathering occurrence records from databases that were available on commonly accessed public databases prior to our surveys. These data were considered representative of the scope and type of data that would be readily avail- able for spatial planning at that time. Databases accessed were iNaturalist (inaturalist.org, ReptileMap and Frog- Map (http://vmus.adu.org.za/) for North West Province as of 31 December 2018. Data from ReptileMap and Frog- Map partly consist of records collated and published by past atlassing projects, which included museum records and photographs contributed by citizen scientists (Minter et al. 2004; Bates et al. 2014). Therefore, these platforms include records of varying quality, but are representative of the actual data that would be readily available for spa- tial planning. Our intent was not to improve the quality of the historical records, but to utilise the same data that would likely be used by biodiversity practitioners. Given our study objectives, we did not attempt to georeference data of low precision/missing coordinates, nor attempt to confirm identifications of existing museum specimens or photos. The dataset was, however, updated for outdated taxonomy and checked for geographic coordinate errors as compared to locality descriptions. Notably, some of the historical FrogMap data were at quarter-degree grid square (QDS ~ 625 km’) resolution only, although pho- tographic records were available at higher resolution. UI- timately, the publicly available records were filtered to include only those with sufficiently precise locality data (geographic coordinates to at least one decimal place), while removing duplicate records (usually from the liter- ature) and records where precision or accuracy was lack- ing (e.g. QDS precision or lower, obscured coordinates). Species distribution maps were downloaded (as of 31 December 2018) from the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species (https://www.iucnredlist.org/) and the South Af- rican Species Status website (http://speciesstatus.sanbi. org/). These were used to create species richness maps in QGIS v.3.2 (QGIS 2022) by merging all map polygons. The merged layers were intersected with a fine resolution zse.pensoft.net 104 grid (5 minute x 5 minute coordinate grid — termed ‘pen- tad’) roughly 9 km x 9 km in size. To estimate species richness per grid cell, the number of distribution poly- gons intersecting with each cell was summed using QGIS v.3.2. Species richness maps for South African reptiles and amphibians were then created by depicting the counts of species per grid cell using a colour gradient. We created a density map to show the spatial distribu- tion of accurate records available for the Province. There- fore, all records that were only available at a low reso- lution (1.e. QDS or lower) were not included. Using the filtered and edited dataset, the density of species records was calculated in QGIS v.3.2 through the ‘counts’ analy- sis tool and done so separately for reptiles and amphibians to generate maps of existing sampling effort (i.e. record density). The density of accurate records was mapped to identify undersampled areas in the Province (Fig. 2). Tak- ing into account the sampling gaps, but also habitat varia- tion and logistical constraints, three main sites were then chosen for dedicated 10-day surveys (March 2019 in the north-west, October 2019 in the north-east, April 2020 in the south), which included active diurnal and nocturnal searching and the use of trap arrays (Fig. 2). An extra site was chosen for a brief five-day survey using only active searching (November 2020). At each main site, three trap arrays were set out consisting of Y-shaped fence lines with 10-m arms, along which six funnel traps and four pitfalls were set (after Maritz et al. 2007). For daytime ac- tive searches, two separate teams (three people per team) walked daily transects starting at the same location, but moving in different directions. Transect sites were chosen, based on habitat quality and ease of access. Each transect was timed, running for a minimum of two hours during the morning. Transects started when ambient temperature was at least 20 °C, but after two hours, searches were terminated if the ambient temperature exceeded 38 °C and if no records had been made for at least 30 minutes. In some cases, searches were continued for longer than two hours if the above conditions had not yet been met. For night-time active searches, two separate teams drove different routes at 30-35 km.hr' along asphalt and dirt roads, starting at dusk and lasting for up to three hours or until ambient temperatures dropped below 20 °C. Roads were scanned for any reptiles or amphibians. Occurrence of reptiles and amphibians were record- ed using GPS (~ 3 m precision) and DNA samples and/ or voucher specimens were taken for a representative set of individuals. All voucher specimens were fixed in 10% formalin and transferred to 70% ethanol after 48 hours and DNA samples were preserved in NAP buffer. After processing, voucher specimens were deposited in the National Museum, Bloemfontein and DNA samples were deposited in the National Wildlife Biobank (South African National Biodiversity Institute, Pretoria). Species identifications were made based on scalation and other morphological features using standard field guides for the region (e.g. Branch 1998; Marais 2011), including historical guides containing detailed information on morphology (FitzSimons 1943, 1962; Broadley 1990). zse.pensoft.net Tolley, K.A. et al.: Herpetological discoveries in North West Province The exclusive use of colouration and known distributions was avoided for making identifications (see Stephens et al. 2022). Some specimens recorded in the field could not be confidently identified to species level (n = 24), particularly in cases of species with weakly defined “diagnostic” traits that overlap with other species (see Stephens et al. 2022). Other unidentified records were represented by shed skins or severely damaged road-kill specimens. For these records, a tentative field identification was assigned at either species or genus level and this was followed up using a DNA barcoding approach to assign the final species identification. The choice of ‘barcoding’ gene varied, based on the available comparative sequence data on GenBank (mitochondrial: /6S, Cyt-b, ND4 and nuclear: c-mos). To carry out barcoding, tissues were dried in a vacuum centrifuge prior to DNA extraction. Total genomic DNA was extracted using a salt extraction protocol (Aljanabi and Martinez 1997). PCR amplification varied according to genes, using the following primer sets— /6S: 16Sa and 16Sb (Palumbi et al. 2002); ND4: L4437 and H5540 (Macey et al. 1997) or ND4-F3 and ND4-R4 (Arévalo et al. 1994); Cyt-b: L14910 and H16064 (Burbrink et al. 2000); c-mos: CMOS-FUF and CMOS-FUR (Gamble et al. 2008). For all genes, an initial denaturation step was carried out for 4 min at 95 °C, followed by 35 cycles of denaturation (94 °C, 45 S), with annealing varying according to gene (51—58 °C, 45 s) and an extension (72 °C, | min). This was followed by a final extension at 72 °C for 10 min. PCR products were quantified by electrophoresis on 1% agarose gel. Sanger sequencing was carried out at Macrogen (Amsterdam, Netherlands) using the forward primers for each gene. Sequences were checked, edited and aligned in Geneious v.11.1.5 (https:/Awww.geneious.com). Each sequence was then submitted to BLAST: Basic Local Alignment Search Tool (https://blast.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/Blast.cgi) using the Geneious BLAST plug-in. For each sample, a ‘similarity score’ (percentage of DNA base-pair similarity) to existing sequences on GenBank was estimated using the BLAST Sequence Analysis Tool available at the NCBI (National Center for Biotechnology Information; https:// www.ncbi.nilm.nih.gov/). Final identifications were made based on this similarity score, with scores close to 100% considered strong support for the identification. In two cases (Psammophis sp. and Pelomedusa sp.), the range of potential matches were not available on GenBank for the genes we sequenced. We, therefore, sequenced comparative material from the South African National Wildlife DNA Bank from potentially matching species (i.e. Psammophis brevirostris, Pelomedusa galeata and Pelomedusa subrufa). New records were collated with the historical dataset to create a final dataset of all records for the Province that met our accuracy and precision criteria. Range ex- tensions were identified as species recorded outside the existing known distributions from the IUCN (www. iucnredlist.org/), with additional guidance taken from maps in Bates et al. (2014) for reptiles and Minter et al. (2004) for amphibians. Zoosyst. Evol. 99 (1) 2022, 101-116 Gl 131-140 23.0 74.0 25.0 76.0 70 78.0 b) Record density 0 fd ot .. sebee Po ~ = ‘fe * o 96%) matching either sequences on GenBank or matching our additional sequenced material (Table 2). In total, the samples were identified as twelve different species. Ten of these were already present in the pre-existing provincial dataset (Anura: Amietia delalandii, Amietia poyntoni, Tomopterna krugerensis, Tomopterna tandyi,; Squamata: Agama atra, Hemidactylus mabouia, Trachylepis punctatissima, Naja nivea, Psammophis brevirostris, Testudine: Pelomedusa galeata). There was also one newly-recorded species that was previously known from only one inaccurate record and had been considered possibly incorrect (Squamata: Chondrodactylus bibronii) and one invasive species (Hemidactylus mabouia). Furthermore, the tentative field identifications for four species were incorrect and two records were assigned only a genus level identification while in the field. The barcoding, however, allowed for a correct identification of these records to the species level (Table 2). Sequences of barcoded specimens were accessioned on GenBank (Table 2). Overall, our field surveys added a total of 578 new re- cords (477 reptile and 101 amphibian records) from 74 reptile and 20 amphibian species and these data have been deposited with the Global Biodiversity Information Facil- ity (www.gbif.org) and are publicly available (https://do1. org/10.15468/v9y9p5). An additional 319 new records made by citizen scientists were deposited on iNatural- ist, motivated by our interactions with North West Prov- ince citizenry (Table 1, Appendices 1, 2: Tables Al, A2). Altogether, the data represent a 68% increase in the herpe- tofaunal dataset for the Province. New records increased the provincial coverage to 124 of the 198 grid cells, repre- senting an increased geographic coverage of approximate- zse.pensoft.net Tolley, K.A. et al.: Herpetological discoveries in North West Province ly 20% (Fig. 2). The new records bring the total number of species with accurate and credible records to 102 reptile and 23 amphibian species for North West Province. By comparing our records to the known geographic range for each species (1.e. Bates et al. 2014; see also https://www.iucnredlist.org/), we recorded range extensions for Python natalensis (~ 50 km), Causus rhombeatus (~ 100 km), Chondrodactylus bibronii (~ 100 km), Elapsoidea sundevalii fitzsimonsi (~ 250 km; Tolley et al. 2020) and confirmed the presence of Dendroaspis polylepis in the west of the Province, for which there had been a 200 km geographic gap in the existing records (Fig. 3). Our new records of Chondrodactylus bibronii confirm the occurrence of this species as an outlier from the main distribution (Bates et al. 2014; compare to specimen PEM RO00344 collected in 1905). Our records come from a nearby region to that recently confirmed by Heinz et al. (2021) from the Northern Cape Province, suggesting the range of this species may have been underestimated historically and might still be underestimated. This resulted in our interpretation of the distribution map being extended to include the area from where these records were made. We also recorded a new, extra-limital locality for Hemidactylus mabouia, the identification of which was confirmed by the barcoding (Table 2). It is likely that this specimen was brought into Molopo Nature Reserve in a delivery of hay for animal feed (GJA, NST & KAT, pers. obs. 2019). Our final dataset was used to create updated species richness maps for South African reptiles and amphibians using the same methods described above (Fig. 4) and to produce a species list for the Province (Appendices 1, 2: Tables Al, A2). Discussion Our targeted surveys in North West Province resulted in a substantial increase in the size of the provincial herpeto- faunal dataset in comparison to accurate records collected over the previous 100 years — we increased the dataset by 68% in only two years. Our records were also of better quality than those in the pre-existing historical dataset, with more precise locality information and many voucher specimens that are linked to tissue samples. Our pre-sur- vey analyses of record density allowed us to strategically target areas most in need of survey effort and to focus sur- vey techniques to maximise the chance of recording spe- cies that had not previously been recorded in the surveyed areas. Thus, our records were almost all geographically unique, increasing their value and impact for regional plan- ning and assessment of biodiversity. Our surveys revealed that several species are more widespread in North West Province than historical records indicated, resulting in the extension of several known ranges. Our comparative anal- ysis of species richness also showed that estimates were influenced by sampling intensity, suggesting that further Zoosyst. Evol. 99 (1) 2022, 101-116 107 12.5°E 15.0% 175° 200° 225°C 15.0°E 17,.5°E 12.5°E 15.0°E 17.5°E 20.0°E 22.5°E 25.0°E 35.0°S| 15.0°E 17.5°E 20.0°E 22.5°E 15.0°E 17.5°E 20.0°E 22,5°E Figure 3. Currently inferred ranges of reptiles from South Africa where survey data confirm previously uncertain range edges for a. Chondrodactylus bibronii; b. Dendroaspis polylepis; extend previously inferred ranges for c. Pelomedusa galeata; d. Python natalensis; include new records that are outlying to the currently inferred range edge for e. Causus rhombeatus, f. Elapsoidea sundevalli; and represent a new extra-limital record for g. Hemidactylus mabouia. Black squares show the localities (at the quarter degree level) for new records that influence the known range extents, whereas the open squares show previously-existing records. zse.pensoft.net 108 Tolley, K.A. et al.: Herpetological discoveries in North West Province Table 2. Tentative field identifications that were confirmed or alternative identifications made through DNA barcoding. Provided in the columns are the field number, taxonomic information, GenBank accession numbers for each gene and the percentage sequence similar- ity to DNA sequences on GenBank given in parentheses. Dashes indicate genes not sequenced. Additional material sequenced for com- parative purposes are also provided. Voucher specimen numbers are given where available (PEM: Port Elizabeth Museum, NMB: Na- tional Museum Bloemfontein). The species are ordered alphabetically by taxonomic hierarchy (by Order, Family and Genus/species). Field # Order Family Field ID Barcoded ID 16S Cyt- b ND4 c-mos Voucher $1016 Anura Pyxicephalidae Amietia delalandii A. delalandii OP508237 - - - - (100) M144 Anura Pyxicephalidae Amietia delalandii A. delalandii OP508236 - - - - (100) TO99A Anura Pyxicephalidae Amietia poyntoni A. poyntoni OP508238 - - - - (100) TO99B Anura Pyxicephalidae Amietia poyntoni A. poyntoni OP508239 - - - - (100) T7114 Anura Pyxicephalidae Amietia poyntoni A. delalandii OP508240 - i es = (99.8) T115 Anura Pyxicephalidae Amietia poyntoni A. delalandii OP508241 - - - - (99.8) $902 Anura Pyxicephalidae § Tomopternacryptotis T. krugerensis OP508720 - - - - (99.6) NOO1 Anura Pyxicephalidae Tomopterna sp. T. tandyi OP50871 - - - NMB (99.8) A08209 T024 Anura Pyxicephalidae Tomopterna sp. T. tandyi OP508718 - - - NMB (99.8) A08257 7123 Anura Pyxicephalidae Tomopterna sp. T. tandyi OP508719 - - - NMB (99.8) A08255 T089 Squamata Agamidae Agama sp. A. atra OP508303 - - - NMB (99.4) R11946 TO90 Squamata Agamidae Agama sp. A. atra OP508304 - - - NMB (99.4) R11947 M038 Squamata Elapidae Naja nivea (skin) N. nivea OP508307 - - - - (100) $891 Squamata Gekkonidae § Chondrodactylus bibronii —_C. bibronii = OP508305 = = = 5 (96.2) $941 Squamata Gekkonidae Hemidactylus mabouia =H. mabouia OP508306 - - - NMB (96.6) R11828 KAT20-1 Squamata Psammophiidae Psammophis brevirostris P. brevirostris - OP535022 OP535026 OP535017 - (99.9) (99.9) (100) NO20 Squamata Psammophiidae Psammophis brevirostris P. brevirostris - OP535023 OP535027 OP535018 NMB (99.9) (99.9) (100) R11904 NO61 Squamata Psammophiidae Psammophis brevirostris P. brevirostris - - OP535028 OP535019 NMB (99.7) (100) R11954 M041 Squamata Scincidae Trachylepis spilogaster T. punctatissima OP508516 - - - NMB (99.4) R11844 M047 Squamata Scincidae Trachylepis spilogaster T. punctatissima OP508517 - - - - (99.4) $839 Squamata Scincidae Trachylepis spilogaster_ T. punctatissima OP508518 - - - NMB (99.6) R11807 $876 Squamata Scincidae Trachylepis spilogaster T. punctatissima OP508519 - - - NMB (99.6) R11839 $904 Squamata Scincidae Trachylepis spilogaster T. punctatissima OP508520 - - - NMB (99.6) R11820 M143 Testudines Pelomedusidae Pelomedusa galeata P. galeata OP508410 - - ~ ~ (100) Additional material sequenced GAL10 Testudines | Pelomedusidae Pelomedusa galeata na OP508410 - - - ~ HB048 Testudines §Pelomedusidae Pelomedusa galeata na OP508411 - - - - MB 21424 Testudines § Pelomedusidae Pelomedusa galeata na OP508412 - - ~ - MBUR 00553 Testudines § Pelomedusidae Pelomedusa galeata na OP508413 - - - - MBUR 01266 Testudines §Pelomedusidae Pelomedusa galeata na OP508414 - - - - RSP0O57 Testudines Pelomedusidae Pelomedusa galeata na OP508415 - - - - $594 Testudines | Pelomedusidae Pelomedusa galeata na OP508416 - - ~ ~ TGE T3-8 Testudines §Pelomedusidae Pelomedusa galeata na OP508417 - - — WC-5833 Testudines § Pelomedusidae Pelomedusa galeata na OP508418 - - - PEM R23646 WP318 Testudines §Pelomedusidae Pelomedusa galeata na OP508419 - - - - HB521 Testudines | Pelomedusidae Pelomedusa subrufa na OP508420 - - ~ ~ MBUR 00238 Squamata Psammophiidae Psammophis brevirostris na — OP535024 OP535029 OP535020 - MBUR 01225 Squamata Psammophiidae Psammophis brevirostris na - OP535025 OP535030 OP535021 - zse.pensoft.net Zoosyst. Evol. 99 (1) 2022, 101-116 surveys in the Province are needed. These findings high- light the importance of targeted biodiversity sampling in improving baseline occurrence datasets, which form the foundation for development plans and supporting conser- vation management (see Brooks et al. 2004; Collen et al. 2008; Hoveka et al. 2020; Hamilton et al. 2022). Surprisingly, several of the range extensions recorded in our surveys were large-bodied species that would not be expected to go undetected in areas of occurrence and is further testament to how poorly the area has been surveyed to date. As with the range extensions for mammals (Power et al. 2019), most were recorded in the western parts of the Province in areas that we identified as particularly under- sampled. Probably the most notable range extension detected in our surveys was for the Southern African Python, Python natalensis. We recorded this large-bodied and iconic species outside of its previously known range in the western and southern parts of the Province, with some new records indicating that the distribution also extends into adjacent parts of Free State Province in the vicinity of Bloemhof Nature Reserve and Sandveld Nature Reserve (ca. 27.64°S, 25.69°E). Given the notoriety of this species, it is difficult to accept that it has simply evaded detection in these areas in the past. Nevertheless, 1t does appear that records are still rather scant overall, although in recent years, there have been an increasing number of reports from the public to provincial conservation authorities regarding P. natalensis (RJ Power, Pers. Obs.). This could mean the species naturally occurs in low densities or these are observations of vagrants. Alternatively, the apparent increase in observations could indicate that P. natalensis is expanding its geographic range. Alexander (2007) showed that the distribution of P. natalensis is limited by environmental temperatures mainly due to limitations imposed on effective incubation of clutches by breeding females. It is, thus, possible that the range of this species has extended south into previously cooler areas in response to climatic warming. Given their comparable biogeographic affinities and similarities in the geographic boundaries of their distributions, expansion of ranges in North West Province due to climatic warming may also explain our findings of many new records for other snake species, as well as for some mammals (Power and Olivier 2019). For example, Black Mamba (Dendroaspis polylepis) and Common Night Adder (Causus rhombeatus) both have large ranges that extend into the tropical hot savannah of southern, eastern and west-central Africa (see Alexander and Marais 2007; Phelps 2010; Marques et al. 2018; Spawls et al. 2018; Chippaux and Jackson 2019; Pietersen et al. 2021). The possibility of south or westward range expansion of these snakes highlights another valuable function of targeted surveys in revealing the geographic dynamics of distributions of species. It 1s also possible that, in the future, similar changes will be detected on a bioregional scale, with significant implications for conservation planning and development. Within the North West Province, the zoogeography has been broadly divided into three areas that generally correspond to defined ecological bioregions: the western 109 arid Kalahari, eastern mesic Bushveld and southern High- veld grasslands based on mammals (Power and Olivier 2019). These areas also broadly correspond to the obvi- ous east-west climatic gradient (Fig. 1, see also Cole et al. 2021). Previous work on mammals has shown that there is also a species richness gradient across the Province, with higher richness in the east, declining to the west (Power et al. 2019). Our findings show a similar gradi- ent in species richness for the herpetofauna. However, the herpetofaunal species richness gradient 1s not entirely congruent with the ecoregions. Similar to mammals, the eastern mesic Bushveld ecoregion does have the highest species richness for both reptiles and amphibians, but species richness of the reptiles is also relatively high in southern Highveld grasslands and arid Kalahari (Figs 1, 4). This difference between mammals and reptiles may be the result of many species of reptiles being well-adapted to arid conditions. In contrast, the richness pattern for am- phibians strongly matches that of the ecoregions, with a declining east-west richness gradient (Figs 1, 4), from the Central Bushveld to Highveld grasslands to arid Kalahari, that is similar to mammals (Power and Olivier 2019). Species Richness Figure 4. Species richness for a. Reptiles; b. Amphibians from South Africa. Dissimilarity between the species richness patterns for mammals and reptiles demonstrates the limitations of relying on selected taxonomic groups as surrogates for biodiversity planning (Cox et al. 2022). At present, the biodiversity conservation plan for North West Province zse.pensoft.net 110 is biased towards the more comprehensive publicly ac- cessible datasets of the mammals, birds and plants (North West Department of Rural, Environment and Agricultural Development (READ) 2015), a range of taxa that may not have adequately captured general biological patterns needed for regional planning. The additional focus on gathering data for reptiles and amphibians will, thus, con- tribute towards a more comprehensive approach for fu- ture provincial conservation plans that can conserve bio- diversity more inclusively. While it is essential to collect basic biological and natural history data for development planning, the collection of long-term datasets consisting of accurate spatial distribution data have been underval- ued historically (Greene 2005; Stroud and Thompson 2019; Miller et al. 2020; Travis 2020). As a result, ex- ploratory surveys and collection of foundational data are typically under-funded as compared to hypothesis-driven research (Meineke et al. 2019; Miller et al. 2020), mak- ing such studies unappealing for research efforts, even though they are essential for identifying priority areas for conservation planning and areas critical for the protection of biodiversity. For example, targeted biological surveys in Mozambique (e.g. Conradie et al. 2016) have resulted in mountain inselbergs being identified as Key Biodiver- sity Areas (WCS, Governo de Mocambique and USAID 2021), clearly demonstrating the conservation value of basic survey data. Several specimens collected during our surveys were difficult to identify with meaningful confidence required for biodiversity inventories. This was the result of the presence of several morphologically similar species occurring in the area (e.g. Trachylepis sp.: Stephens et al. 2022; Amietia sp..: Channing et al. 2016; Jomopterna sp.: Channing and du Preez 2020) and, in some cases, fragmentary evidence (e.g. specimens consisting of parts of shed skin or extensively damaged roadkill). We made use of barcoding to verify the identity of these specimens and resolved uncertainty of the specimen identity in all cases. Barcoding thus acts as a quality check for difficult identification and prevented the perpetuation of identifications of cryptic species being based on geographic location. We reiterate the views of Stephens et al. (2022) that the geographic location of a Specimen should not be used as an identification attribute as this leads to the perpetuation of identification errors. Thus, we recommend that barcoding be incorporated as part of the standard protocols in future surveys, particularly for morphologically conservative species groups. The dearth of records for even charismatic or noto- rious species might be sufficient to foster renewed in- terest in surveying North West Province. This need not be limited to bona fide scientific institutions and citizen scientists should be incentivised to inventory such areas (i.e. contributing to online platforms or BioBlitz projects; Parker et al. 2018). Our study greatly benefitted from our targeted engagements with citizens and clearly in- creased the number of records and species recorded from the Province and we strongly encourage this avenue of data collection. Indeed, there is an increasing reliance of citizen science-based distribution mapping (Tiago et al. zse.pensoft.net Tolley, K.A. et al.: Herpetological discoveries in North West Province 2017; Johnston et al. 2020). However, this approach does have some limitations in terms of accurate identifications, due to photos that may be inadequate to make confident identifications or confusion around morphologically con- servative taxa. Our additional means of DNA barcoding for species identification emphasises the importance of professional scientists to be at the forefront, particularly so when highlighting the risks of overlooking certain spe- cies when only the phenotype is considered. Conclusion The significant impact of the data collected during our targeted surveys on the North West Province biodiversity database demonstrates the benefit of conducting targeted surveys for filling geographic gaps in species distribution data. Unfortunately, the recent trend of increasing levels of red tape relating to bureaucratic hurdles associated with the collection of biological data can severely impede progress (Alves et al. 2018; Friso et al. 2020; Alexander et al. 2021). We, thus, implore national and provincial authorities to cut bureaucracy and to facilitate the pro- vision of essential permits. A reduction of red tape will provide a positive feedback loop, encouraging research- ers to carry out biodiversity surveys that support the very same national and provincial authorities that issue these permits. Notwithstanding, the updated knowledge of the Province’s herpetofauna makes a new and vital contribu- tion when it comes to further iterations of the provincial and national biodiversity sector plans. Furthermore, there is a wealth of historical (i.e. museum) data that do not currently influence biodiversity planning. In addition, some of these data lack precision and/or accuracy making those sources less tractable. While beyond the scope of the present study, a concerted effort to make these records publicly available and to improve these records through georeferencing and/or consulting original literature or notes could provide an additional source of accurate re- cords for biodiversity planning. Such data also would be extremely valuable for tracking distribution shifts or bio- diversity losses over time and contribute greatly to IUCN Red List assessments, tracking long-term species assem- blage shifts, as well as ground-truthing of climatic niche models. Thus, efforts should be made to incorporate both new survey data, as well as historical data to address cur- rent and future conservation goals. Acknowledgements We would like to thank the North West Province Depart- ment of Economic Development, Environment, Conser- vation and Tourism for research permits, logistical assis- tance, as well as the North West Parks Board for access to protected areas (Molopo, Botsalano and Mafikeng Game Reserves) and numerous private landowners who allowed access to their properties. We are grateful to Jody Bar- ends, Keith Dube, Nkanyiso Dlamini, Falie Forster, Kim Zoosyst. Evol. 99 (1) 2022, 101-116 Scholtz, Kirstin Stephens and Jody Taft for assistance in the field. Josh Weeber assisted with GIS and mapping, Michael Bates and Cora Stobie assisted with museum ac- cessions and Hannelie Synman and Fhatani Ranwashi un- dertook the GBIF submission on our behalf. Jean-Jacques Forgus is thanked for the laboratory work for DNA bar- coding, Uwe Fritz for advice on Pelomedusa and Werner Conradie for the photo of Hemidactylus mabouia. Col- lated pre-survey data were provided by iNaturalist and by the Biodiversity and Development Institute — Virtual Museum at the Percy FitzPatrick Institute of African Or- nithology (namely, ReptileMap and FrogMap). The many original contributors to both these platforms (museums, researchers and citizens) are thanked for their records that are part of those databases. This project was fund- ed by the National Research Foundation of South Africa, Foundational Biodiversity Information Program (UID 115944) and was carried out under provincial permits NW7299/02/2019 and NW7898/03/2020. References Alexander GJ (2007) Thermal Biology of the Southern African Python (Python natalensis): Does temperature limit distribution? In: Hen- derson RW, Powell R (Eds) Biology of the Boas and Pythons. Eagle Mountain Publishing LC, Eagle Mountain, Utah, 50-75. Alexander GJ, Marais J (2007) A Guide to the Reptiles of Southern Africa. Struik Publishers, Cape Town, 408 pp. Alexander GJ, Harrison JA, Fairbanks DH, Navarro RA (2004) Bioge- ography of the frogs of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland. In: Minter LR, Burger M, Harrison JA, Braack HH, Bishop PJ, Kloepfer D (Eds) Atlas and Red Data Book of the Frogs of South Africa, Leso- tho and Swaziland. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC, 3 1-47. Alexander GJ, Tolley KA, Maritz B, McKechnie A, Manger P, Thom- son RL, Schradin C, Fuller A, Meyer L, Hetem R, Cherry M, Con- radie W, Bauer AM, Maphisa D, O’Riain J, Parker DM, Mlambo MC, Bronner G, Madikiza K, Engelbrecht E, Lee ATK, Jansen van Vuuren B, Mandiwana-Neudani T, Pietersen D, Venter JA, Somers MJ, Slotow R, Strauss WM, Humphries MS, Kerley GIH (2021) Excessive red tape is strangling biodiversity research in South Africa. South African Journal of Science 17(9/10): 1-4. https://dot. org/10.17159/sajs.2021/10787 Aljanabi SM, Martinez I (1997) Universal and rapid salt-extraction of high-quality genomic DNA for PCR based techniques. Nucle- ic Acids Research 25(22): 4692-4693. https://doi.org/10.1093/ nar/25.22.4692 Alves RJV, Weksler M, Oliveira JA, Buckup PA, Pombal Jr JP, Santa- na HR, Peracchi AL, Kellner AW, Aleixo A, Langguth A, Almeida A, Albernaz AL, Ribas CC, Zilberberg C, Grelle CE, Rocha CFD, Lamas CJ, Haddad CFB, Bonvicino CR, Prado CPA, Lima DOD, Rossa-Feres DC, Santos FRD, Salimena FRG, Perini FA, Bockmann FA, Franco FL, Giudice GMLD, Colli GR, Vieira ICG, Marinho-Fil- ho J, Werneck JMCF, Santos JADD, Nascimento JLD, Nessimian JL, Cordeiro JLP, Claro KD, Salles LO, Casatti L, Py-Daniel LHR, Silveira LF, Toledo LF, Oliveira LFD, Malabarba LR, Silva MDD, Couri MS, Martins M, Tavares MDS, Sobral MEG, Vieira MV, Ol- iveira MDLA, Pinna MD, Hopkins MJG, Solé M, Menezes NA, Pas- sos P, D’ Andrea PS, Pinto PCA, Viana PL, Toledo PM, Reis R, Vile- 111 la R, Bastos RP, Collevatti RG, Cerqueira R, Castroviejo-Fisher S, Caramaschi U (2018) Brazilian legislation on genetic heritage harms Biodiversity Convention goals and threatens basic biology research and education. Anais da Academia Brasileira de Ciéncias 90(2): 1279-1284. https://doi.org/10.1590/0001-3765201820180460 Arévalo E, Davis SK, Sites JW (1994) Mitochondrial DNA sequence di- vergence and phylogenetic relationships among eight chromosome races of the Sce/oporus grammicus complex (Phrynosomatidae) in Central Mexico. Systematic Biology 43(3): 387-418. https://doi. org/10.1093/sysbio/43.3.387 Bates MF, Branch WR, Bauer AM, Burger M, Marais J, Alexander GJ, de Villiers MS [Eds] (2014) Atlas and Red List of the Reptiles of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland. Suricata 1. South African National Biodiversity Institute, Pretoria, 485 pp. Branch B (1998) Field Guide to Snakes and Other Reptiles of Southern Africa. Struik, Cape Town, 399 pp. Branch WR (2014) Conservation status, diversity, endemism, hotspots and threats. In: Bates MF, Branch WR, Bauer AM, Burger M, Mara- is J, Alexander GJ, de Villiers MS (Eds) Atlas and Red List of the Reptiles of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland. Suricata 1. South African National Biodiversity Institute, Pretoria, 22—50. Broadley DG (1990) FitzSimons’ Snakes of Southern Africa. Jonathan Ball and Ad. Donker Publishers, Parklands, 387 pp. Brooks T, da Fonseca GA, Rodrigues AS (2004) Species, data, and conservation planning. Conservation Biology 18(6): 1682-1688. https://doi.org/10.1111/).1523-1739.2004.00457.x Burbrink FT, Lawson R, Slowinski JB (2000) Mitochondrial DNA phylogeography of the polytypic North American rat snake (E/aphe obsoleta): A critique of the subspecies concept. Evolution 54(6): 2107-2118. https://doi.org/10.1111/.0014-3820.2000.tb01253.x Channing A, du Preez LH (2020) Taxonomic status of the cryptic sand frog, Tomopterna cryptotis (Anura, Pyxicephalidae). Alytes 37(3—-4): 1-22. Channing A, Dehling JM, Létters S, Ernst R (2016) Species boundaries and taxonomy of the African river frogs (Amphibia: Pyxicephali- dae: Amietia). Zootaxa 4155(1): 1-76. https://doi.org/10.11646/ zootaxa.4155.1.1 Chippaux JP, Jackson K (2019) Snakes of Central and Western Africa. John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, Maryland, 429 pp. Cole J, Sogayise S, Dudumashe N (2021) An overview of vegetation health in the North West Province, South Africa, between 2010 and 2020. IOP Conference Serios: Earth and Environmental Science 932: 012004. Collen B, Ram M, Zamin T, McRae L (2008) The tropical biodiversity data gap: Addressing disparity in global monitoring. Tropical Conservation Science 1(2): 75-88. https://doi. org/10.1177/194008290800100202 Conradie W, Bittencourt-Silva GB, Engelbrecht HM, Loader SP, Menegon M, Nanvonamuquitxo C, Scott M, Tolley KA (2016) Exploration of the hidden world of Mozambique’s sky island forests: New discoveries of reptiles and amphibians. Zoosystematics and Evolution 92(2): 163-180. https://doi.org/10.3897/zse.92.9948 Cox N, Young BE, Bowles P, Fernandez M, Marin J, Rapacciuolo G, Bohm M, Brooks TM, Hedges SB, Hilton-Taylor C, Hoffmann M, Jenkins RKB, Tognelli MF, Alexander GJ, Allison A, Ananjeva NB, Aulitya M, Avila LJ, Chapple DG, Cisneros-Heredia DF, Cogger HG, Colli GR, de Silva A, Eisemberg CC, Els J, Fong GA, Grant TD, Hitchmough RA, Iskandar DT, Kidera N, Martins M, Meiri S, Mitchell NJ, Molur S, Nogueira C, Ortiz JC, Penner J, Rhodin AGJ, Rivas G, Rédel M-O, Roll U, Sanders KL, Santos-Barrera G, Shea zse.pensoft.net 112 GM, Spawls S, Stuart BL, Tolley KA, Trape J-F, Vidal MA, Wag- ner P, Wallace BP, Xie Y (2022) Global reptile assessment shows commonality of tetrapod conservation needs. Nature 605: 285-290. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-022-04664-7 FitzSimons VFM (1943) The Lizards of South Africa. Memoirs of the Transvaal Museum 1: [i—xv] 1-528. FitzSimons VFM (1962) Snakes of Southern Africa. Purnell & Sons, Cape Town, 423 pp. Friso F, Mendive F, Soffiato M, Bombardelli V, Hesketh A, Heinrich M, Menghini L, Politi M (2020) Implementation of Nagoya Pro- tocol on access and benefit-sharing in Peru: Implications for re- searchers. Journal of Ethnopharmacology 259: 112885. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.jep.2020.112885 Gamble T, Bauer AM, Greenbaum E, Jackman TR (2008) Evidence for Gondwanan vicariance in an ancient clade of gecko lizards. Journal of Biogeography 35: 88-104. Greene HW (2005) Organisms in nature as a central focus for biol- ogy. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 20(1): 23-27. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.tree.2004.11.005 Hamilton H, Smyth RL, Young BE, Howard TG, Tracey C, Breyer S, Cameron DR, Chazal A, Conley AK, Frye C, Schloss C (2022) Increasing taxonomic diversity and spatial resolution clarifies op- portunities for protecting imperiled species in the US. Ecological Applications 32(3): e2534. https://doi.org/10.1002/eap.2534 Heinz MD, Brennan IG, Jackman TR, Bauer AM (2021) Phylogeny of the genus Chondrodactylus (Squamata: Gekkonidae) with the establish- ment of a stable taxonomy. Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zo- ology 163(5): 151-210. https://doi.org/10.3099/0027-4100-163.5.151 Holness S, Driver A, Todd S, Snaddon K, Hamer M, Raimondo D, Daniels F, Alexander G, Bazelet C, Bills R, Bragg C, Branch B, Bruyns P, Chakona A, Child M, Clarke RV, Coetzer A, Coetzer W, Colville J, Conradie W, Dean R, Eardley C, Ebrahim I, Edge D, Gaynor D, Gear S, Herbert D, Kgatla M, Lamula K, Leballo G, Lyle R, Malatji N, Mansell M, Mecenero S, Midgley J, Mlambo M, Mtshali H, Simaika J, Skowno A, Staude H, Tolley K, Underhill L, van der Colff D, van Noort S, von Staden L (2016) Biodiversity and Ecological Impacts: Landscape Processes, Ecosystems and Species. In: Scholes R, Lochner P, Schreiner G, Snyman-Van der Walt L, de Jager M (Eds) Shale Gas Development in the Central Karoo: A Scientific Assessment of the Opportunities and Risks. CSIR/TU/021MH/EXP/2016/003/A, ISBN 978-0-7988-563 1-7, Pretoria: CSIR. http://seasgd.csir.co.za/scientific-assessment-chapters/ Hoveka LN, van der Bank M, Bezeng BS, Davies TJ (2020) Identifying biodiversity knowledge gaps for conserving South Africa’s endemic flora. Biodiversity and Conservation 29(9): 2803-2819. https://doi. org/10.1007/s1053 1-020-01998-4 Johnston A, Moran N, Musgrove A, Fink D, Baillie SR (2020) Estimat- ing species distributions from spatially biased citizen science data. Ecological Modelling 422: 108927. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolm- odel.2019.108927 Macey JR, Larson A, Ananjeva NB, Papenfuss TJ (1997) Evolutionary shifts in three major structural features of the mitochondrial genome among iguanian lizards. Journal of Molecular Evolution 44: 660- 674. https://doi.org/10.1007/PL00006190 Marais J (2011) A Complete Guide to the Snakes of Southern Africa. Penguin Random House, Cape Town, 312 pp. Maritz B, Masterson G, Mackay D, Alexander GJ (2007) The effect of funnel trap type and size of pitfall trap on trap success: Implica- tions for ecological field studies. Amphibia-Reptilia 28(3): 321-328. https://doi.org/10.1163/15685380778 1374746 zse.pensoft.net Tolley, K.A. et al.: Herpetological discoveries in North West Province Marques MP, Ceriaco LM, Blackburn DC, Bauer AM (2018) Diversity and Distribution of the Amphibians and Terrestrial Reptiles of An- gola: Atlas of Historical and Bibliographic Records (1840-2017). California Academy of Sciences, San Francisco, 501 pp. Measey J, Tarrant J, Rebelo A, Turner A, du Preez L, Mokhatla M, Conradie W (2019) Has strategic planning made a difference to amphibian conservation research in South Africa? Bothalia-African Biodiversity & Conservation 49(1): 1-13. https://doi.org/10.4102/ abc.v4911.2428 Meineke EK, Davies TJ, Daru BH, Davis CC (2019) Biological col- lections for understanding biodiversity in the Anthropocene. Philo- sophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 374(1763): 20170386. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2017.0386 Miller SE, Barrow LN, Ehlman SM, Goodheart JA, Greiman SE, Lutz HL, Misiewicz TM, Smith SM, Tan M, Thawley CJ, Cook JA, Light JE (2020) Building natural history collections for the twenty- first century and beyond. Bioscience 70(8): 674-687. https://doi. org/10.1093/biosci/biaa069 Minter LR, Burger M, Harrison JA, Braack HH, Bishop PJ, Kloeper D (2004) Atlas and Red Data Book of the Frogs of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland. SI/MAB Series #9. Smithsonian Institution, Washington DC, 360 pp. Mucina L, Rutherford MC [Eds] (2006) The vegetation of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland. Strelitzia 19. South African National Biodi- versity Institute, Pretoria, 807 pp. National Planning Commission (2012) National Development Plan 2030 — Our Future-make it work. Department: The Presidency, Re- public of South Africa, 70 pp. https://www.gov.za/documents/na- tional-development-plan-2030-our-future-make-it-work North West Department of Rural, Environment and Agricultural De- velopment [READ] (2015) North West Biodiversity Sector Plan. North West Provincial Government. December 2015., Mahikeng, 112 pp. Palumbi S, Martin A, Romano S, McMillan WO, Stice L, Grabowski G (2002) Simple Fool’s Guide to PCR, Version 2.0. Department of Zoology and Kewalo Marine Laboratory, Honolulu, 45 pp. Parker SS, Pauly GB, Moore J, Fraga NS, Knapp JJ, Principe Z, Brown BV, Randall JM, Cohen BS, Wake TA (2018) Adapting the BioBlitz to meet conservation needs. Conservation Biology 32(5): 1007-1019. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13103 Phelps T (2010) Old World Vipers. Edition Chimaira, Frankfurt am Main, 558 pp. Pietersen D, Verburgt L, Davies J (2021) A Field Guide to Snakes and Other Reptiles of Zambia and Malawi. Penguin Random House Pub- lishers, Cape Town, 376 pp. Power BJ, Olivier PI (2019) Zoogeography of a South African Province: A framework for management. African Journal of Ecology 57(2): 198-211. https://dot.org/10.1111/aje. 12590 Power RJ, Verburgt L (2014) The herpetofauna of the North West Province: a literature survey. Department of Economic Development, Environment, Conservation & Tourism, North West Provincial Government, Mahikeng, 82 pp. Power RJ, Van Straaten A, Schaller R, Mooke M, Boshoff T, Nel HP (2019) An inventory of mammals of the North West Province, South Africa. Annals of the Ditsong National Museum of Natu- ral History 8(1): 6-29. https://journals.co.za/doi/abs/10.10520/ EJC-141b4d1b3c QGIS (2022) QGIS Geographic Information System. QGIS Associa- tion. http://www.qgis.org Zoosyst. Evol. 99 (1) 2022, 101-116 Skowno AL, Jewitt D, Slingsby JA (2021) Rates and patterns of habitat loss across South Africa’s vegetation biomes. South African Journal of Science 117(1—2): 1-5. https://doi.org/10.17159/sajs.202 1/8182 Spawls S, Howell K, Hinkel H, Menegon M (2018) Field Guide to East African Reptiles. Bloomsbury Publishing, London, 624 pp. Stephens K, Alexander GJ, Makhubo BG, Telford NS, Tolley KA (2022) Mistaken identity: Challenges with specimen identification for morphologically conservative skinks (Zrachylepis) leads to taxo- nomic error. African Journal of Herpetology 1-18. https://doi.org/10 .1080/21564574.2021.2019838 [Latest Articles online] Stroud JT, Thompson ME (2019) Looking to the past to understand the future of tropical conservation: The importance of collecting basic data. Biotropica 51(3): 293-299. https://doi.org/10.1111/ btp.12665 Telford NS, Alexander GJ, Becker FS, Conradie W, Jordaan A, Kemp L, le Grange A, Rebelo AD, Strauss P, Taft JM, Weeber J, Tolley KA (2022) Extensions to the known geographic distributions of reptiles in the Great Karoo, South Africa. Herpetological Conservation and Biology 17(1): 145-154. http:/(www.herpconbio.org/Volume_17/ Issue_1/Telford_etal_2022.pdf Tiago P, Pereira HM, Capinha C (2017) Using citizen science data to estimate climatic niches and species distributions. Basic and Applied Ecology 20: 75-85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.baae.2017.04.001 Appendix 1 Reptile species (listed by Order and Family) recorded from or presumed to occur in the North West Province, South Africa. Those with accurate records are indicat- ed (X) for each time period (pre-survey years — through 2018 and survey years — 2019 & 2020). If indicated by a Q in the pre-survey column, there are records for the species, but only at the resolution of quarter-degree grid square (QDS). Distribution column indicates species (X) with IUCN distribution maps that intersect with the 113 Tolley KA, Alexander GJ, Branch WR, Bowles P, Maritz B (2016) Conservation status and threats for African reptiles. Biolog- ical Conservation 204: 63-71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bio- con.2016.04.006 Tolley KA, Weeber J, Maritz B, Verburgt L, Bates MF, Conradie W, Hofmeyr MD, Turner AA, da Silva JM, Alexander GJ (2019) No safe haven: Protection levels show imperilled South African reptiles not sufficiently safe-guarded despite low average extinction risk. Biological Conservation 233: 61-72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bio- con.2019.02.006 Tolley KA, Telford NS, Makhubo BG, Scholtz KJ, Barends JM, Alexander GJ (2020) Refinement of locality data for FitzSimons’ Garter Snake Elapsoidea sundevalliii fitzsimonsi Loveridge, 1948 provides a better estimation of its distribution. Herpetology Notes 13: 685-692. Travis T (2020) Where is natural history in ecological, evolutionary, and behavioral science? American Naturalist 196(1): 1-8. https:// doi.org/10.1086/708765 WCS, Governo de Mogambique, USAID (2021) Red List of threatened species, ecosystems, identification and mapping of Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs) in Mozambique — Final Report (VOL. I). Maputo: USAID / SPEED+, 97 pp. https://mozambique.wes.org/Initiatives/ Key-Biodiversity-Areas-KBAs.aspx Province, although some have not been recorded from the Province. The species are indicated as endemic, near endemic (> 90% of range in South Africa) or not endem- ic to South Africa and the IUCN Red List assessment type (Global or Regional), threat category and threat criteria as of 2021 are given for each species. DD: Data Deficient, LC: Least Concern, VU: Vulnerable (no En- dangered or Critically Endangered species occur in the North West Province). Table Al. Reptile species (listed by Order and Family) recorded from or presumed to occur in the North West Province, South Africa. Survey Distribution South African Assessment Threat Threat Order Family Genus Species Pre- survey Crocodylia Crocodylidae Crocodylus niloticus X Squamata- Lizard Agamidae Acanthocercus atricollis X Agamidae Agama aculeata X Agamidae Agama atra X Amphisbaenidae Dalophia pistillum Q Amphisbaenidae Monopeltis capensis X Amphisbaenidae Monopeltis infuscata Q Amphisbaenidae Monopeltis leonhardi Amphisbaenidae Monopeltis mauricei X Amphisbaenidae Zygaspis quadrifrons X Chamaeleonidae § Chamaeleo dilepis X Cordylidae Chamaesaura aenea Cordylidae Cordylus jonesii X Cordylidae Cordylus vittifer X Cordylidae Karusasaurus polyzonus Q Cordylidae Pseudocordylus melanotus Gekkonidae Chondrodactylus __ bibronii Gekkonidae Chondrodactylus __ turneri X Gekkonidae Hemidactylus mabouia X Gekkonidae Homopholis arnoldi X Gekkonidae Lygodactylus bradfieldi X Occurrence Type Category Criteria X X Not Endemic Regional VU A2ac X X Not Endemic Regional LC X X Not Endemic Regional LC X X Near Endemic Global LG X Not Endemic Regional LC X Near Endemic Global LEG X Not Endemic Regional LC X Near Endemic Global LC X Not Endemic Regional LC X Not Endemic Regional LC X X Not Endemic Regional LC X Near Endemic Global LC X X Not Endemic Regional LC X X Near Endemic Global LC X Near Endemic Global LC X Near Endemic Global LG X X Not Endemic Regional LC X X Not Endemic Regional LC X X Not Endemic Regional LC X Not Endemic Regional LC X Not Endemic Regional LC zse.pensoft.net 114 Order Squamata- Lizard Squamata- Snake Family Gekkonidae Gekkonidae Gekkonidae Gekkonidae Gekkonidae Gekkonidae Gerrhosauridae Lacertidae Lacertidae Lacertidae Lacertidae Lacertidae Lacertidae Lacertidae Lacertidae Lacertidae Scincidae Scincidae Scincidae Scincidae Scincidae Scincidae Scincidae Scincidae Scincidae Scincidae Scincidae Scincidae Scincidae Scincidae Scincidae Varanidae Varanidae Atractaspididae Atractaspididae Atractaspididae Atractaspididae Atractaspididae Atractaspididae Atractaspididae Colubridae Colubridae Colubridae Colubridae Colubridae Colubridae Colubridae Colubridae Elapidae Elapidae Elapidae Elapidae Elapidae Elapidae Elapidae Elapidae Lamprophiidae Lamprophiidae Lamprophiidae Lamprophiidae Lamprophiidae Lamprophiidae Lamprophiidae Lamprophiidae Prosymnidae Prosymnidae Leptotyphlopidae zse.pensoft.net Genus Lygodactylus Lygodactylus Pachydactylus Pachydactylus Pachydactylus Ptenopus Gerrhosaurus Heliobolus Ichnotropis Meroles Nucras Nucras Nucras Nucras Pedioplanis Pedioplanis Acontias Acontias Acontias Mochlus Panaspis Trachylepis Trachylepis Trachylepis Trachylepis Trachylepis Trachylepis Trachylepis Trachylepis Trachylepis Trachylepis Varanus Varanus Amblyodipsas Amblyodipsas Aparallactus Atractaspis Atractaspis Homoroselaps Xenocalamus Crotaphopeltis Dasypeltis Dispholidus Philothamnus Philothamnus Philothamnus Telescopus Thelotornis Aspidelaps Dendroaspis Elapsoidea Elapsoidea Hemachatus Naja Naja Naja Boaedon Gracililima Lamprophis Limatormosa Lycodonomorphus Lycodonomorphus Lycodonomorphus Lycophidion Prosymna Prosymna Leptotyphlops Species capensis ocellatus affinis capensis wahibergii garrulus flavigularis lugubris capensis squamulosus holubi intertexta lalandii ornata lineoocellata namaquensis gracilicauda kgalagadi occidentalis sundevallii wahlbergii capensis damarana laevigata occidentalis punctatissima punctulata spilogaster sulcata varia variegata albigularis niloticus polylepis ventrimaculata capensis bibronii duerdeni lacteus bicolor hotamboeia scabra typus hoplogaster occidentalis semivariegatus semiannulatus capensis scutatus polylepis boulengeri sundevallii haemachatus annulifera mossambica nivea capensis nyassae aurora capensis inornatus laevissimus rufulus capense bivittata sundevallii distanti Pre- survey X >< >< OK OK KOK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK KOK OK OK OK OK OK OX < << X< < << X< << OK KK KOK KKK KK KOK KK OO XK KX ~x< x< &< OK KK KK X< Tolley, K.A. et al.: Herpetological discoveries in North West Province Survey Distribution South African Assessment X < < << X< x< &< << KK KK KK OX < << X< < << KX X< >< >< OK OK KOK OK KOK OK OK KOK OK KOK OK KOK OK KOK OK KOK OK KOK OK OK OK OK OX >< << OK KOK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK KOK OK KOK OK KOK OK OK OK OK OK KOK OK OK OX Occurrence Not Endemic Near Endemic Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Near Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Near endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Near Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Near Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Near Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Near Endemic Not Endemic Near Endemic Near Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Near Endemic Near Endemic Type Regional Global Global Regional Regional Regional Regional Regional Regional Regional Regional Regional Global Regional Regional Regional Global Regional Regional Regional Regional Regional Regional Global Regional Regional Regional Regional Regional Regional Regional Regional Regional Regional Regional Regional Regional Regional Global Regional Regional Regional Regional Regional Global Regional Regional Regional Regional Regional Regional Regional Global Regional Regional Regional Regional Regional Global Regional Global Global Regional Regional Regional Global Global Threat Threat Category Criteria Le LC LC LC Le LC LG LC LC LC Le LC LC LC LC Le LC LC LC LC Le LC LC LC Le LC LG LC LC LC Le Le LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC Zoosyst. Evol. 99 (1) 2022, 101-116 Order Squamata- Snake Testudines Family Leptotyphlopidae Leptotyphlopidae Psammophiidae Psammophiidae Psammophiidae Psammophiidae Psammophiidae Psammophiidae Psammophiidae Psammophiidae Pseudaspididae Pseudoxyrhophiidae Pythonidae Typhlopidae Typhlopidae Viperidae Viperidae Viperidae Viperidae Pelomedusidae Pelomedusidae Testudinidae Testudinidae Testudinidae Testudinidae Testudinidae Appendix 2 Genus Leptotyphlops Leptotyphlops Dipsina Psammophis Psammophis Psammophis Psammophis Psammophis Psammophylax Psammophylax Pseudaspis Duberria Python Afrotyphlops Rhinotyphlops Bitis Bitis Causus Causus Pelomedusa Pelusios Homopus Kinixys Kinixys Psammobates Stigmochelys Species incognitus scutifrons multimaculata angolensis brevirostris crucifer leightoni subtaeniatus rhombeatus tritaeniatus cana lutrix natalensis bibronii lalandei arietans caudalis defilippii rhombeatus galeata sinuatus femoralis lobatsiana spekii oculifer pardalis Pre- survey Q X << KK KOK KK KX =< << OK KK XK X< Amphibian species (listed by Family) recorded from or presumed to occur in the North West Province, South Af- rica. Those with accurate records are indicated (X) for each time period (pre-survey years — through 2018 and survey years — 2019 & 2020). If indicated by a Q in the pre-survey column, there are records for that species, but only at the less precise quarter-degree level and these re- cords were not included in the mapping datasets. Map- ping column indicates species (X) which are presumed to Survey Distribution South African Assessment >< << OK KK KOK OK KKK KOK OK OK OK OK CO < << KK OK OX Occurrence Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Near Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Near Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Near Endemic Not Endemic Endemic Near Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Type Regional Regional Regional Regional Regional Global Regional Regional Global Regional Regional Regional Regional Regional Regional Regional Regional Regional Regional Global Regional Global Global Regional Regional Regional Threat ie Threat Category Criteria LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC VU LC LC LC A4cde occur in the Province given their overall distribution, but have not yet been recorded. The species are indicated as endemic, near endemic (> 90% of range in South Africa) or not endemic to South Africa and the IUCN Red List as- sessment type (Global or Regional), threat category as of 2021 are given for each species. LC: Least Concern, NE: Not Evaluated (No Critically Endangered, Endangered, Vulnerable or Near Threatened amphibians occur in the North West Province). Table A2. Amphibian species (listed by Family) recorded from or presumed to occur in the North West Province, South Africa. Order Anura Anura Anura Anura Anura Anura Anura Anura Anura Anura Anura Anura Anura Anura Anura Anura Anura Anura Anura Anura Family Bufonidae Bufonidae Bufonidae Bufonidae Bufonidae Bufonidae Bufonidae Bufonidae Bufonidae Hemisotidae Hyperoliidae Hyperoliidae Hyperoliidae Brevicpetidae Microhylidae Phrynobatrachidae Pipidae Ptychadenidae Ptychadenidae Pyxicephalidae Genus Species Poyntonophrynus — fenoulheti Poyntonophrynus — vertebralis Schismaderma carens Sclerophrys capensis Sclerophrys garmani Sclerophrys gutturalis Sclerophrys poweri Sclerophrys pusilla Vandijkophrynus — gariepensis Hemisus marmoratus Hyperolius marmoratus Kassina senegalensis Semnodactylus wealii Breviceps adspersus Phrynomantis bifasciatus Phrynobatrachus _ natalensis Xenopus laevis Hildebrandtia ornata Ptychadena porosissima Amietia delalandii Pre-survey Survey Distribution South African Assessment X X Q X X X X X X X X X X Q X X X X X X X X X X X >< << OK KK OK OK OK OK KOK OK KOK OK OK OK OK OK OX Occurrence Not Endemic Endemic Not Endemic Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Near Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Type Global Global Global Global Global Global Global Global Global Global Global Global Global Global Global Global Global Global Global Global Threat Category LC Le LC LG LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LG LC LC LC LC LC LC LC LC zse.pensoft.net 116 Order Anura Anura Anura Anura Anura Anura Anura Anura Anura Anura Anura Anura Anura Anura Family Pyxicephalidae Pyxicephalidae Pyxicephalidae Pyxicephalidae Pyxicephalidae Pyxicephalidae Pyxicephalidae Pyxicephalidae Ptychadenidae Ptychadenidae Pyxicephalidae Pyxicephalidae Pyxicephalidae Rhacophoridae zse.pensoft.net Genus Amietia Amietia Pyxicephalus Strongylopus Tomopterna Tomopterna Tomopterna Cacosternum Ptychadena Ptychadena Pyxicephalus Strongylopus Tomopterna Chiromantis Species fuscigula poyntoni edulis grayll adiastola krugerensis tandyi boettgeri anchietae mossambica adspersus fasciatus natalensis xerampelina Pre-survey Survey Distribution South African Assessment O XK © >< << KKK KK OX Tolley, K.A. et al.: Herpetological discoveries in North West Province < << X< >< << KK KOK KOKO OK OK OK CO Occurrence Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Near Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Not Endemic Near Endemic Not Endemic Type Global Global Global Global Not Evaluated Global Global Global Global Global Global Global Global Global Threat Category LC LC LG LC NE LC LC LG LC LC LC LC EG LC