Marine Ecology.

ISSN 0173-9565

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Environmental niche of the smut lizard population

on a sandy coastal ecosystem of Southeastern
Tenerife (Canary Islands)
Antonio de los Santos & Juan Pedro de Nicolás
Department of Parasitology, Ecology and Genetics, University of La Laguna, La Laguna, Tenerife, Canary Islands, Spain

Keywords
Disturbances; lizard population size; sandy
beach; seasonal and interyearly variability;
thermal and adaphic environment.
Correspondence
Antonio de los Santos, Department of
Parasitology, Ecology and Genetics, University
of La Laguna, C ⁄ Astrofı́sico Fco. Sanchez,
s ⁄ n. 38206 La Laguna, Sta. Cruz de Tenerife,
Canary Islands, Spain.
E-mail: asantos@ull.es
Conflict of interest
The authors declare no conflict of interests.
Abstract
Relationships among environmental patterns and population size of the smut
lizard Gallotia galloti galloti Oudart, 1839 (Sauria Lacertidae) were examined in
the context of longer time-scale variability on a sandy beach and adjacent envi-
ronments of Southeastern Tenerife. Seasonal and yearly patterns in the popula-
tion size were likewise analyzed in relation to climatic and anthropic variables.
Six sampling plots (coastal, sweet tabaiba, tuff, lava, sandy lava and crater)
were selected following a perpendicular transect to the sandy fringe that
extends from the beach toward the volcanic interior. Pitfall trapping was con-
ducted from 1984 to 2005, and capture–mark–recapture technique and the
Jolly–Seber method were used to estimate population sizes. The highest popu-
lation size estimates were shown on the sandy lava plot and the neighboring
lava plot, reaching values of about 3500 individuals ha)1 during the spring.
The population was active almost the whole year, with seasonal patterns of
activity from March to October. Seasonal temperature and population size pat-
terns were correlated but the ‘calima’ episodes produced some disturbance.
Gallotia galloti galloti was one of the most abundant lizards of all the species
studied and its population size has not remained stable over the study period,
probably because of the absence of predation and competition, and because of
human interference and environmental instability.

and as a frugivorous, pollinator and an effective seed

Problem
The sandy beach and dunes of the Special Natural Reserve
of the Malpaı́s of Güı́mar, and their assemblage will be
on high risk levels over the next decades by impacts
caused by town planning development schemes in the
surrounding environment. To manage, understand, and
restore the ecological assemblages, the roles of individual
keystone species have to be understood and considered
(Paine 1969). We have carried out a monitoring of the
pattern and the population dynamics of the smut lizard
since 1984 to assess the environment impact of anthropic
activities. This insular species of lizard performs a key-
stone species role as a predator of many of insect species
disperser in volcanic habitats (Barquı́n & Wildpret 1975;
Valido & Nogales 1994; Nogales et al. 1998; Olesen &
Valido 2003). We explore how isolation in time or space
may affect the population dynamics and the risk of
extinction. Although isolation can be the result of many
ecological processes, its role in affecting the structure and
dynamics of populations is not often acknowledged
directly.
The study of the population size variability should con-
sider several factors that influence the interpretation of the
obtained estimates (Xia & Boonstra 1992). We explored the
influence of the substrate on the spatial population-size
variability by means of environment availability to support

2 Marine Ecology 29 (Suppl. 1) (2008) 2–11 ª 2008 The Authors. Journal compilation ª 2008 Blackwell Publishing Ltd
de los Santos & de Nicolás
the incubation of lizard eggs (Bons 1972; Heatwole
1977) or by means of the food availability, especially
psammophilous insects, which may play a role in the insec-
tivore juveniles distribution patterns (de los Santos et al.
2000, 2002b, 2006). We also examined the potential effects
of seasonal changes in the thermal environment on the
temporal population-size variability in the most visible ec-
tothermic vertebrate group, lizards. Similar to that of other
ectothermic vertebrates (Hutchison & Dupré 1992), nearly
all aspects of the biology of smut lizards depend on thermal
environment (a biophysical aggregate of air temperature,
wind speed, relative humidity, and radiation) (Tracy &
Christian 1986).
In this study, we also explored the extent of the density
compensation hypothesis (DC) on islands (MacArthur
et al. 1972). The islands often show extreme DC (Schoen-
er 1989), possibly caused by a lack of interspecific compe-
tition and predation (Schoener & Schoener 1980).
We predicted a long-term decrease in the lizard’s niche
resources (environmental and bionomics) because of the
anthropic interferences, and consequently a decrease in
their abundance. The lizard population size is substan-
tially less variable through time (Schoener 1985) than
most of Connell and Sousa’s populations (Connell &
Sousa 1983). We need to understand the role of habitat
and microhabitat use in lizard ecology to be able to assess
the potential impact of such environmental changes and
to suggest possible conservation measures (Smith & Bal-
linger 2001). Lastly, for a long term, we outline the
hypothesis that impeding or slowing down the energy
flow and matter from the beach will make the Malpaı́s
enter in a degenerative phase with the consequent
decrease in the population size of the keystone species
G. galloti galloti.
Study area
Field work was undertaken in the sandy beach and adja-
cent environments of the Special Natural Reserve of the
Malpaı́s of Güı́mar on the coast of the Southeastern (lee-
ward) Tenerife. This relatively new geological environ-
ment was formed about 10,000 years ago (Araña &
Carracedo 1978). Lava erupted from Montaña Grande
Volcano and flowed downhill from the volcanic cones
reaching the ocean where much of it was broken into tiny
pieces by the surf. The resulting black sand was deposited
by long-shore currents and wave action into ephemeral
pocket beaches that later on, was transported toward the
interior primarily by winds blowing NE and deposited
forming small dunes onto the lava fields (Fig. 1). Nowa-
days, for reasons of urban development the Malpaı́s of
Güı́mar is being isolated from these environmental pro-
cesses that formed it.
Marine Ecology 29 (Suppl. 1) (2008) 2–11 ª 2008 The Authors. Journal compilation ª 2008 Blackwell Publishing Ltd
Environmental niche of the smut lizard population
The climate for the study area is dry temperate (Fer-
nandopullé 1976). The dominant vegetation type in the
volcanic laundries is xerophytic scrub, rich in succulents,
especially cactiform or dendroid spurges (such as Euphor-
bia canariensis L., E. balsamifera Ait., E. obtusifolia Poir.
and Ceropegia fusca Bolle). On the sandy fringe, it settles
a pseudo-steppe gramineous formation of thatching-buffel
grass, characterized by high cover of several hemicryptó-
fites: Hyparrhenia hirta (L.) Stapf in Oliver, Cenchrus cili-
aris L., Aristida adscensionis L. and Tetrapogon villosus
Desf. In their more typical aspect, they are accompanied
by gorse (Launaea arborescens (Batt.) Murb.), bleats (Plo-
cama pendula Ait.) and good firewood (Neochamaelea
pulverulenta (Vent.) Erdtm.).
Material and methods
Sampling methods
Six sampling plots were selected following a perpendicular
transect to the sandy fringe (Fig. 1). Lizard population on
each plot was sampled periodically using pitfall traps for
three annual periods (1984, 1993, 2004–2005). The aver-
age radius of individual activity in G. galloti galloti is
ca. 12.5 m (personal observations not published; likewise
see Molina-Borja 1985, 1987, 1991). In 1984, a square
grid of five traps was established on each sampling plot,
one in each corner 25 m apart, plus one in the center
(2500 m2 spacing). A square grid of 3 · 3 traps (10 m
apart, 2025 m2 spacing) was established in the tuff and
lava plots during 1993, and a rectangular grid of 4 · 5
traps (10 m apart, 3575 m2 spacing) was established in
the sandy lava plot (1993 and 2004 ⁄ 2005) and the lava
plot (2004 ⁄ 2005). Traps were processed weekly. Pitfall
traps were designed to increase capture efficiency using
tin cans (diameter 20 cm; height 50 cm), with banana
and tomato bait, and roofs of volcanic flagstone placed
several centimeters over the top of the tin, to avoid heat-
ing. The time of operation of the traps was 4 h, always
beginning at 8 am on the summer solstice and at 9 am
on the winter solstice.
Captured lizards were marked by amputating some fin-
gers at the level of the last joint and released within 2 m
of each trap. The mutilation of fingers is the most exten-
sively used individual-specific marking technique (Wood-
bury 1956; Broadley 1974), and allows the
characterization of a great number of individuals.
Statistical analyses
Population sizes were estimated using the capture–mark–
recapture method and considering the category Y (Jolly
1965; Seber 1965). Jolly’s modification of trellis type II
3
Environmental niche of the smut lizard population
lists recaptures of animals according to their most recent
mark. The notation used follows that of Seber (1982) and
Jolly (1982). Capture–recapture data for males and
females on each sampling occasion are tabulated in modi-
fied trellis type II and rearrangement data in trellis type II
for Zi. Hence, the first number of each column is ni, and
the subsequent numbers are recaptures of each sampling
day. The sum of all entries in columns gives sums of suc-
cessive recaptures of animals released on a given day (Ri).
By summing the rows from the left, Zi animals are accu-
mulated in the columns and the mi animals are summed
in the hypotenuse cells. The total number of animals in
the population at the time the ith sample is taken (Pi)
presents a standard error that is calculated as the square
root of the variance for population estimates at day i
(ESPi).
4 Marine Ecology 29 (Suppl. 1) (2008) 2–11 ª 2008 The Authors. Journal compilation ª 2008 Blackwell Publishing Ltd
de los Santos & de Nicolás
Fig. 1. Geographical localization of the study
area (Malpaı́s de Güı́mar) and sampling plots
(black circles), in the island of Tenerife
(Canary Islands).
Results
Table 1 summarizes the population parameters for the
capture–recapture analysis according to Jolly’s model
for 1984 sampling year. The population size estimates
of G. galloti galloti were significantly different among
the different sampling plots, although these were some-
what variable between the serial sampling periods. The
maximum estimates recorded for the population size of
G. galloti galloti consistently occurred on the sandy lava
plot reaching values of about 3500 individuals ha)1
during the spring. As expected for this species, changes
in the weekly capture success are assumed to be a con-
sequence of differences in activity and density, which
are correlated with the temperature. In general, the
highest population size estimates were associated with
de los Santos & de Nicolás Environmental niche of the smut lizard population

Table 1. Capture–recapture analysis of

population parameters of Gallotia galloti plot date Ri mi Zi Mi Pi ESPi
galloti on six sampling plots (0.25 ha) for coastal 25 ⁄ 2 ⁄ 1984 2
February–April 1984 according to Jolly’s 3 ⁄ 3 ⁄ 1984 0 0 2
stochastic model. 17 ⁄ 3 ⁄ 1984 0 0 0
24 ⁄ 3 ⁄ 1984 2 2 0 2.00 6.00 0.00
31 ⁄ 3 ⁄ 1984 2 2 0 2.00 3.00 0.00
7 ⁄ 4 ⁄ 1984
sweet tabaiba 25 ⁄ 2 ⁄ 1984 0
3 ⁄ 3 ⁄ 1984 4 0 0 0.00
17 ⁄ 3 ⁄ 1984 7 1 3 4.43 35.43 29.92
24 ⁄ 3 ⁄ 1984 3 6 4 32.67 108.89 71.04
31 ⁄ 3 ⁄ 1984 1 4 3 37.00 101.75 107.01
7 ⁄ 4 ⁄ 1984 4
tuff 17 ⁄ 3 ⁄ 1984 1
24 ⁄ 3 ⁄ 1984 1 0 1 5.00
31 ⁄ 3 ⁄ 1984 1 1 1 17.00 272.00 433.77
7 ⁄ 4 ⁄ 1984 2
lava 25 ⁄ 2 ⁄ 1984 7
17 ⁄ 3 ⁄ 1984 2 1 6 46.00 690.00 835.43
24 ⁄ 3 ⁄ 1984 2 2 6 56.00 504.00 498.83
31 ⁄ 3 ⁄ 1984 2 6 2 21.00 52.50 37.62
7 ⁄ 4 ⁄ 1984 4
sandy lava 25 ⁄ 2 ⁄ 1984 2
17 ⁄ 3 ⁄ 1984 7 1 2 8.71 235.29 260.48
24 ⁄ 3 ⁄ 1984 5 3 6 37.80 365.40 266.60
31 ⁄ 3 ⁄ 1984 1 7 4 159.00 863.14 954.82
7 ⁄ 4 ⁄ 1984 5
crater 25 ⁄ 2 ⁄ 1984 0 3
3 ⁄ 3 ⁄ 1984 1 0 3
17 ⁄ 3 ⁄ 1984 1 1 2 3.00 3.00 0.00
24 ⁄ 3 ⁄ 1984 1 0 2
31 ⁄ 3 ⁄ 1984 1 0 1
7 ⁄ 4 ⁄ 1984

Ri is the total of recaptured animal marked on day i and recaptured subsequently; mi is the
number of marked animals in the ith sample; Zi is the total number of animals captured on a
day previous to i, not captured at day i, and captured again later; Mi is the number of marked
animals in the population at the time the ith sample is taken; Pi is the total number of animals
in the population at the time the ith sample is taken; ESPi, standard error at day i.

the interface sand-lava, which is related with the trans-
port and dispersion of marine sand over the coastal
volcanic laundries.
The population size variation during the 1993 and
2004–2005 sampling years is shown in Fig. 2, in relation
to maximum and minimum temperatures. The maximum
estimates recorded for the population size of G. galloti
galloti consistently occurred during the same season on
each sampling plot. As expected for this warm environ-
ment, there was a long individual activity period from
February to November. A narrow relationship between
the minimum temperature variation and the population
size variation was observed, although it is not obtained
unless the variables are categorized by year cycle periods.
The categories are more or less coincident with seasonal
ranges of temperature. When the temperature was stabi-
lized inside the ranges or thermal categories, the popula-
tion size decreased temporarily.
The emergence of individuals after a short period of
inactivity (brumation) was quite predictable. First, lizards
were mostly captured in early February (average soil sur-
face temperature 15–16 C, range = 13.5–20.5 C; maxi-
mum temperature 19–23 C; minimum temperature
11–12 C). Within a few weeks, the population size
reached high numbers. During March with a weak
increase in the temperatures (average soil surface temper-
ature 19.5 C; range = 13.5–23 C), lizards showed a
maximum population size. Later on, a remarkable descent
of the population size took place during April. Neverthe-
less, an increment of the average soil surface temperature

Marine Ecology 29 (Suppl. 1) (2008) 2–11 ª 2008 The Authors. Journal compilation ª 2008 Blackwell Publishing Ltd 5
Environmental niche of the smut lizard population
during May–June (average soil surface temperature 22 C;
range = 18–25 C), allows to register the biggest popula-
tion size. This peak in the population size corresponds to
equally high standard error, which indicated that individ-
ual surface activity were the greatest within this range of
temperatures. By November (average temperature 19 C;
range = 15.5–23 C), lizards were no longer active at the
soil surface. Finally, during the cold, humid months of
December and January, captures were rare.
The microvariations observed in the population size
curve appear to be of a different character from those of
the year interval. Seasonal temperature patterns and pop-
6 Marine Ecology 29 (Suppl. 1) (2008) 2–11 ª 2008 The Authors. Journal compilation ª 2008 Blackwell Publishing Ltd
de los Santos & de Nicolás
Fig. 2. Population size variation of Gallotia
galloti galloti during the 1993 (a, b, c, f, g, h)
and 2004–2005 (d, e, i, j) sample years, in
relation to the maximum (right column) and
minimum (left column) temperatures, on
sandy lava (a, f, d, i), lava (b, g, e, j) and tuff
(c, h) plots in the Special Natural Reserve of
the Malpaı́s of Güı́mar. Population size (black
dots); temperature (white dots).
ulation sizes were correlated but the calima episodes
considerably modified this correlation. The calima phe-
nomenon happens at any time of the year but is usually
associated with the hot air found over the islands during
the summer months, ranging from a few hours up to a
week. In addition, the fine sand particles cause the air to
become thick and visibility becomes rather like that expe-
rienced during a thick fog, depending on the severity.
Other climatic episodes, such as rainfall, clouds and heat
shocks, also modify this correlation.
Figure 3 shows the temporal distribution during three
sample years of population size of G. galloti galloti on a
de los Santos & de Nicolás
Fig. 3. Seasonal changes in monthly average population size per
hectare (95% CI) of Gallotia galloti galloti in the Malpaı́s of Güı́mar:
(a) 1984, (b) 1993 and (c) 2004 ⁄ 5.
per ha basis on two sampling plots. The temporal distri-
bution of the population monthly means differed over
the study period. The estimates of the population sizes
among years fluctuated between characteristic intervals
for spring, summer and autumn. From 1984 to 2005, a
remarkable decrease in the population sizes has been
shown: 1500–2000 individuals ha)1 (1984), 700 individu-
als ha)1 (1993) and 250–500 individuals ha)1 (2004–
2005). The above observations were most likely related to
the habitat use and distribution patterns of lizard around
the sandy beach.
Marine Ecology 29 (Suppl. 1) (2008) 2–11 ª 2008 The Authors. Journal compilation ª 2008 Blackwell Publishing Ltd
Environmental niche of the smut lizard population
Discussion
Space and time axes of the lizard population niche around a
sandy beach
Pitfall trapping is widely used for capturing animals
found on the ground surface. Critical studies (see reviews
in Southwood 1978) on the efficiency of pitfall trapping
concluded that ‘pitfall traps are of little value for the
direct estimation of populations or for the comparison of
assemblages’ largely because, capture success is highly
influenced by changes in the animals at risk on account
of variables such as weather, substrate, behavior, etc.
However, this is still the primary means of assessing den-
sity of ground-dwelling animals (de los Santos et al.
2002a).
The spatial variation in population size of G. galloti
galloti in the Malpaı́s of Güı́mar can be related to the
sand content in the volcanic laundry, superficially or into
the rock fissures. The maximum values of population size
were registered for the sandy beach (sandy lava plot) and
the lava plot. The individuals rest in the cracks of the
rocks, where they are relatively active, while forage over
the sandy areas, looking for fleshy fruits as well as insects
(Valido et al. 2003). Food resources partitioning between
juveniles and adults, insectivores, frugivores, respectively,
provides a more suitable niche for lizard growth and cre-
ates a stable population in this sand–rock ecosystem.
Juveniles prefer the sandy niche and adults the rocky lava
niche, next to sandy fringe. The development of an
assemblage of psammophilous insect species in the sand
fringe (de los Santos et al. 2002b, 2006) contributes to
the increase in lizard population size. This is an example
of interaction (sensu Tracy & Christian 1986) between the
physical and the biotic axes of the animal niche, suggest-
ing that animals also exploit its physical environment.
The vagility of the population seems to be important
among the most critical factors in the interpretation of
the pitfall captures (Briggs 1961). The behavior of the
individuals, particularly in relation to the vagility or
home range movement, would affect the capture success.
Hence, trap density and capture probability can be related
to behavioral studies of animal movement (Skalski &
Robson 1992).When animals have low net displacement
during the activity period, the population at risk of trap-
ping is confined to the trap area (Crist & Wiens 1995).
These situations occur when individuals are relatively sed-
entary and occupy territories or a well-defined home
range. When individuals are transient to the trap area
and populations have an open spatial structure, other trap
arrangements may be more efficient (Mandelbrot 1983)
because the transect has low probability of recapture and
therefore does not permit the use of mark recapture esti-
mators. However, in cases of high population densities
7
Environmental niche of the smut lizard population
such as our study, a large study area could increase the
absolute number of marked individuals available for
recaptures, when a high number of captured animals are
marked and released after the ith sample. This is equiva-
lent to an increase in the sampling intensity (Blower et al.
1981).
Seasonal variation in thermoregulatory behavior, body-
air temperature and population size patterns remain to be
described for the lizard fauna of any region. In some
studies (Heatwole 1970; Case 1976; Huey & Pianka 1977;
Huey et al. 2003), seasonal models of body temperature,
time of activity, basking incidence, microhabitat utiliza-
tion, and the adult-juvenile activity cycles have been dis-
cussed for some lizard species. As in many lizard faunas
(Huey & Slakin 1976; Huey & Pianka 1977), only juve-
niles of G. galloti galloti are active during the winter
months. The activity of juvenile lizards during the winter
is generally thought to reflect surface-to-volume consider-
ations (Cowles 1941; Fitch 1956) or relatively low fat
reserves of juveniles necessitating greater activity in winter
(Huey & Pianka 1977). Low ‘optimal’ body temperatures
may be correlated with the ability of adults to be active
year round (Huey & Pianka 1977), suggesting that G.
galloti galloti has high optimal body temperature because
adults brumate.
Ground-dwelling lizards of Tenerife may have slightly
higher summer mean Tb values than other species because
they respond to small rises in temperature during the
winter with short periods of activity. It is also necessary
to keep in mind the benign character of the climate in
the coast of Tenerife. Consequently, we should expect
large fluctuations in the lizard population sizes, if we con-
sider that the night minimum temperature does not usu-
ally fall below 13 C and the thermal environment is
conditioned by the Trade winds, ‘calima’ and other inter-
ferences that can introduce changes during short periods
of time.
Beginning with Pianka (1966), many authors have
recognized two basic modes of foraging in lizard, com-
monly called ‘sit and wait’ (SW) and ‘widely foraging’
(WF). Sit-and-wait predators are traditionally considered
sedentary, waiting for prey to enter their field of vision
and then attacking it. Widely foraging species, on the
other hand, typically spend much of their time moving,
actively searching for prey (Huey & Pianka 1981; Perry &
Pianka 1997; Perry 1999). The dispersion of the indivi-
duals (in ⁄ output population) and the behavioral changes
(activity ⁄ inactivity) most notably can increase the esti-
mates of population size as well as their variability.
Hence, we should also look at the insect-juvenile lizard
assemblage niche-relationships in search of the co-occur-
rence with certain pre-imago stages of the insect life
cycles (de los Santos et al. 2006).
8 Marine Ecology 29 (Suppl. 1) (2008) 2–11 ª 2008 The Authors. Journal compilation ª 2008 Blackwell Publishing Ltd
de los Santos & de Nicolás
Comparison with other lizard populations from several
geographical areas
We compared our estimates of population size for
G. galloti galloti with those of lizards in other mainland
and island environments. After standardizing the esti-
mates of population sizes with respect to hectare area, we
observed appreciable differences among populations at
the same and different sites. Although a single lizard spe-
cies exists in the study area, we should consider the com-
petition with other co-occurring insectivorous predators,
if we have in mind the density compensation hypothesis
on islands (MacArthur et al. 1972): the gecko Tarentola
delalandii Duméril & Bibron 1836 (Sauria, Gekkonidae),
the west canary skink Chalcides viridianus Gravenhorst
1851 (Sauria, Scincidae) and the Etruscan pygmy shrew
Suncus etruscus Savi 1822 (Mammalia, Insectivora,
Soricidae).
Although this assemblage of species configures a frame
of interspecific competition, the comparison of the pres-
ent study with other studies shows that unispecific popu-
lation density on the island of Tenerife may be higher
than mainland levels of summed population densities
(Turner et al. 1970; Andrews 1976; Martı́n et al. 1995;
Shenbrot & Krasnov 1997; Beauchamps et al.1998; Young
& Young 2000; Rogovin et al. 2000; Kwiatkowski & Sulli-
van 2002; Sabo & Power 2002; James 2003; Wiederhecker
et al. 2003; Germano & Williams 2005). In relation to
other islands, population densities may be higher than,
similar to or lower than the one found for G. galloti gall-
oti, depending upon the particular island, habitat, and
group of animals studied (Ruibal & Philibosian 1974;
Schoener & Schoener 1980; Reagan 1992; Stamps et al.
1997, see review; Rodda et al. 2001; Towns et al. 2002,
see review; Mcnair 2003, see review). The high density of
G. galloti galloti in Tenerife is only surpassed by the den-
sity of some species in tropical island habitats. A partial
explanation for the large difference is that the average live
weight of this saurian species is approximately 10 times
less than that of G. galloti galloti, half the size, with a
maximum snout-vent length (SVL) of 145 mm in mature
males and a maximum weight of 60 g (Martı́n 1985).
Are lizard population sizes unusually constant
through time?
Strictly speaking, low values of population-size variability
through time imply that lizard populations are constant
(Schoener 1985). An approximate model of stable struc-
ture of the smut lizard niche would consider that adults
are sedentary, and once they have established a territory
on a specific area, rarely move from that site. Coloniza-
tion of new areas would be done primarily by juveniles
de los Santos & de Nicolás
and egg and ⁄ or juvenile mortality may regulate the popu-
lation size (Ruibal & Philibosian 1974).
Several studies have assessed the impact of niche-rela-
tionship changes in lizard populations, on account of
human activities. These changes included the decline in
the population size (over collection, road was built at a
coastal dune site, agricultural practices, clear-cutting, etc.)
(Enge & Marion 1986; Schlesinger & Shine 1994; Shine
et al. 1998; Downes & Shine 1998; Hódar et al. 2000;
Vega et al.2000; Webb & Shine 2000), and the rise in life
expectancy (logging, flooding, timber practices, fire, etc.)
(Mushinsky 1985; Friend 1993; Greenberg et al. 1994; Vitt
et al. 1998; Sartorius et al. 1999; Cosson et al. 1999;
Klingenböck et al. 2000). Even the effects of protective
fencing on lizard may increase or decrease the population
size depending on the species (Brooks 1999).
Galloti galloti galloti is a large, robust and ambulatory
lizard adapted to interstitial life in sandy–rocky environ-
ments, whose abundance in the Natural Reserve of the
Malpaı́s of Güı́mar is interpreted in relation to lack of
predation and competition with congeneric species, and
the big food biomass. Therefore, this insectivore and
frugivore lizard, in its juvenile and adult stages, plays a
significant role in the ecological cycles of this isolated
volcanic ecosystem. The detected decrease in its popu-
lation size over the last 20 years has probably been
caused by environmental impact such as the urban
pressure as a result of planning development scheme
that has isolated the eolian coastal dune deposits from
the sandy beach. Hence, we propose measures such as
the opening of ecological corridors that take into
account the processes and environmental patterns that
facilitate the survival and conservation of this keystone
species.
Acknowledgements
We wish to thank Área de Medio Ambiente y Paisaje
del Excmo. Cabildo Insular de Tenerife for giving us
permission to conduct the research on the Special
Natural Reserve of the Malpaı́s of Güı́mar. Yurena
Rodrı́guez, Gema Padrón provided assistance in the
field. José Fermı́n Sánchez provided helpful suggestions
on an early draft of the manuscript and assisted in the
last redaction.
References
Andrews R.M. (1976) Evolution of life histories: a comparison
of Anolis lizards from matched island and mainland habi-
tats. Breviora Museum of Comparative Zoology, 454, 1–51.
Araña V., Carracedo J.C. (1978) Los volcanes de las Islas Cana-
rias. Vol. I. Tenerife. Ed. Rueda, Madrid: 150 pp.
Marine Ecology 29 (Suppl. 1) (2008) 2–11 ª 2008 The Authors. Journal compilation ª 2008 Blackwell Publishing Ltd
Environmental niche of the smut lizard population
Barquı́n E., Wildpret W. (1975) Diseminación de plantas cana-
rias: Datos iniciales. Vieraea, 5, 38–60.
Beauchamps B.., Wone B., Bros S., Kutilek M. (1998) Habitat
use of the flat-tailed horned lizard (Phrynosoma mcallii
Hallowell 1852) in a disturbed environment. Journal of Her-
petology, 32, 210–216.
Blower J.G., Cook L.M., Bishop J.A. (1981) Estimating the Size
of Animal Populations. George Allen & Unwin Ltd, London:
128 pp.
Bons J. (1972) Herpetologie marocaine. I. Liste commentée
des amphibiens et reptils du Marroc. Bulletin de la Société
de Sciences Naturelles et Physiques du Maroc, 52, 106–126.
Briggs J.B. (1961) A comparison of pitfall trapping and soil
sampling in assessing populations of two species of ground
beetle (Carabidae). Report of the East Malling Research Sta-
tion, 1960, 108–112.
Broadley D.G. (1974) Marking-recapture studies on lizards at
Umtali. Rhodesia Science News, 8, 307–309.
Brooks M. (1999) Effects of protective fencing on birds, liz-
ards, and black-tailed hares in the Western Mojave Desert.
Environmental Management, 23(3), 387–400.
Case T.J. (1976) Seasonal aspects of Thermoregulatory beha-
viour in the Chuckawalla Sauromalus Obesus (Reptilia,
Lacertilla, Iguanidae). Journal of Herpetology, 10(2), 85–95.
Connell J.H., Sousa W.P. (1983) On the evidence needed to
judge ecological stability or persistence. The American Natu-
ralist, 121, 789–824.
Cosson J.F., Ringuet S., Claessens O., De Massary J.C., Dalecky
A., Villiers J.F., Granjon L., Pons J.M. (1999) Ecological
changes in recent land-bridge islands in French Guiana, with
emphasis on vertebrate communities. Biological Conserva-
tion, 91, 213–222.
Cowles R.B. (1941) Observations on the winter activities of
desert reptiles. Ecology, 22(2), 125–140.
Crist T.O., Wiens J.A. (1995) Individual movements and
estimation of population size in darkling beetles (Coleop-
tera: Tenebionidae). Journal of Animal Ecology, 64, 733–
746.
Downes S., Shine R. (1998) Heat, safety, or solitude? Using
habitat selection experiments to identify a lizard’s priorities.
Animal Behaviour, 55, 1387–1396.
Enge K.M., Marion W.R. (1986) Effects of clearcutting and site
preparation on herpetofauna of a north Florida flatwoods.
Forest Ecology and Management, 14, 177–192.
Fernandopullé D. (1976) Climatic characteristics of the Canary
Islands. In: Kunkel G. (Ed.), Biogeography and Ecology in the
Canary Islands. Dr Junk b.v. Publishers, The Hague: pp.
185–206.
Fitch H.S. (1956) Temperature responces in free-living amphi-
bians and reptiles of Northeastern Kansas. University of
Kansas Publications, Museum of Natural History, 8 (7),
417–476.
Friend G.R. (1993) Impact of fire on small vertebrates in Mal-
lee woodlands and heathlands of temperature Australia: a
review. Biological Conservation, 65, 99–114.
9
Environmental niche of the smut lizard population
Germano D.J., Williams D.F. (2005) Population ecology of
blunt-nosed leopard lizards in high elevation foothill habitat.
Journal of Herpetology, 39(1), 1–18.
Greenberg C.H., Neary D.G., Harris R.D. (1994) Effect of
high-intensity wildlife and silvicultural treatments on reptile
communities in sand-pine scrub. Conservation Biology, 8,
1047–1057.
Heatwole H. (1970) Thermal ecology of the desert dragon.
Amphibolurus inermis, Ecological Monographs, 40, 425–457.
Heatwole H. (1977) Habitat selection in reptiles. In: Gans C.,
Tinkle D.W. (Eds), Biology of the Reptilia, Vol. 7. Academic
Press, New York. Pp. 137–155.
Hódar J.A., Pleguezuelos J.M., Poveda J.C. (2000) Habitat
selection of the common chameleon (Chamaeleo chamae-
leon) (L.) in an area under development in southern Spain:
implications for conservation. Biological Conservation, 94,
63–68.
Huey R.B., Pianka E.R. (1977) Seasonal variation in thermo-
regulatory behavior and body temperature of diurnal Kala-
hari lizards. Ecology, 58(5), 1066–1075.
Huey R.B., Pianka E.R. (1981) Ecological consequences of for-
aging mode. Ecology, 62, 991–999.
Huey R.B., Slakin M. (1976) Costs and benefits of lizard ther-
moregulation. Quarterly Review of Biology, 51, 363–384.
Huey R.B., Hertz P.E., Sinervo B. (2003) Behavioral drive
versus behavioral inertia in evolution: a null model
approach. The American Naturalist, 161, 357–366.
Hutchison V.H., Dupré R.K. (1992) Thermoregulation. In:
Feder M.E., Burggren W.W. (Eds), Environmental Physiology
of the Amphibians. University of Chicago Press, Chicago: pp.
206–249.
James J.D. (2003) Short-horned lizard (Phrynosoma hernandesi
hernandesi) populations in Alberta – 2002 Survey results.
Alberta Sustainable Resource Development, Fish and Wild-
life Division, Alberta Species at Risk Report No. 65. Edmon-
ton, AB: 7 pp.
Jolly G.M. (1965) Explicit estimates from capture–recapture
data with both death and immigration-stochastic model.
Biometrika, 52, 225–247.
Jolly G.M. (1982) Mark-racapture models with parameters
constant in time. Biometrika, 38, 301–321.
Klingenböck A., Osterwalder K., Shine R. (2000) Habitat use
and thermal biology of the ‘‘land mullet’’ Egernia major, a
large Scincid lizard from remnant rain forest in southeastern
Australia. Copeia, 2000, 931–939.
Kwiatkowski M.A., Sullivan B. K. (2002) Mating system
structure and population density in a polygynous lizard
Sauromalus obesus (= ater). Behavioral Ecology, 13(2),
201–208.
MacArthur R.H., Diamond J.M., Karr J.R. (1972) Density
compensation in island faunas. Ecology, 53(2), 330–342.
Mandelbrot B.B. (1983) The Fractal Geometry of Nature. Free-
man, San Francisco, CA: 468 pp.
Martı́n A. (1985) Los lagartos de los roques del norte de Tene-
rife. Bonner zoologische Beiträge, 36, 517–528.
10 Marine Ecology 29 (Suppl. 1) (2008) 2–11 ª 2008 The Authors. Journal compilation ª 2008 Blackwell Publishing Ltd
de los Santos & de Nicolás
Martı́n J., López P., Carrascal L.M., Salvador A. (1995) Adjust-
ments of basking postures in the high altitude Iberian rock
lizard (Lacerta monticola). Canadian Journal of Zoology, 73,
1065–1068.
Mcnair D.B. (2003) Population estimate, habitat associations,
and conservation of the St Croix ground lizard Ameiva po-
lops at Protestant Cay, United States Virgin Islands. Carib-
bean Journal of Science, 39(1), 94–99.
Molina-Borja M. (1985) Spatial and temporal behavior of Gal-
lotia galloti in a natural population of Tenerife. Bonner Zoo-
logische Beiträge, 36, 541–552.
Molina-Borja M. (1987) Spatio-temporal distribution of
aggressive and courting behaviors in a population of lizards
(Gallotia galloti) from Tenerife, the Canary Islands. Journal
of Ethology, 5, 11–16.
Molina-Borja M. (1991) Notes on alimentary habits and spa-
tial-temporal distribution of eating behavior patterns in a
natural population of lizards (Gallotia galloti galloti). Vie-
raea, 20, 1–19.
Mushinsky H.R. (1985) Fire and the Florida sandhill
herpetofaunal community: with special attention to
responses of Cnemidophorus sexlineatus. Herpetologica, 41,
333–342.
Nogales M., Delgado J.D., Medina F.M. (1998) Shrikes, lizards
and Lycium intricatum (Solanaceae) fruits: a case of indirect
seed dispersal on an oceanic island (Alegranza, Canary
Islands). Journal of Ecology, 86, 866–871.
Olesen J.M., Valido A. (2003) Lizards as pollinators and seed
dispersal: an insular phenomenon. Trends in Ecology and
Evolution, 18(4), 177–181.
Paine R.T. (1969) Food web complexity and species diversity.
The American Naturalist, 100, 65–75.
Perry G. (1999) The evolution of search modes: ecological ver-
sus phylogenetic perspectives. The American Naturalist,
153(1), 98–109.
Perry G., Pianka E.R. (1997) Foraging behaviour: past, present
and future. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 12, 360–364.
Pianka E.R. (1966) Convexity, desert lizards, and spatial heter-
ogeneity. Ecology, 47, 1055–1059.
Reagan D.P. (1992) Congeneric species distribution and abun-
dance in a three-dimensional habitat: the rain forest Anoles
of Puerto Rico. Copeia, 1992(2), 392–403.
Rodda G.H., Perry G., Rondeau R.J. (2001) The densest terres-
trial vertebrate. Journal of Tropical Ecology, 17, 331–338.
Rogovin A.K., Semenov D.V., Shenbrot G.I. (2000) Lizards of
the Northern Mongolian deserts: densities and community
structure. Asiatic Herpetological Research, 9, 1–9.
Ruibal R., Philibosian R. (1974) The population ecology of the
lizard Anolis acutus. Ecology, 55(3), 525–537.
Sabo J.L., Power M.E. (2002) Numerical response of lizards to
aquatic insects and short-term consequences for terrestrial
prey. Ecology, 83(11), 3023–3036.
de los Santos A., Gómez-González L.A., Alonso C., Arbelo
C.D., de Nicolas J.P. (2000) Adaptive trends of darkling bee-
tles (Col Tenebrionidae) on environmental gradients on the
de los Santos & de Nicolás
island of Tenerife (Canary Islands). Journal of Arid Environ-
ments, 45, 85–98.
de los Santos A., Alonso E.J., Hernández E., Pérez A.M.
(2002a) Environmental correlates of darkling beetle popula-
tion size (Col Tenebrionidae) on the Cañadas of Teide in
Tenerife (Canary Islands). Journal of Arid Environments, 50,
287–308.
de los Santos A., Ferrer F.J., de Nicolás J.P. (2002b) Habitat
selection and assemblage structure of darkling beetles (Col
Tenebrionidae) along environmental gradients on the island
of Tenerife (Canary Islands). Journal of Arid Environments,
52, 63–85.
de los Santos A., Ferrer F., De Nicolás J.P., Crist T.O.
(2006) Thermal habitat and life history of two congeneric
species of darkling beetles (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae) on
Tenerife (Canary Islands). Journal of Arid Environments,
65, 363–385.
Sartorius S.S., Vitt L.J., Colli G.R. (1999) Use of naturally and
antropogenically disturbed habitats in Amazonian rainforest
by the teiid lizard Ameiva ameiva. Biological Conservation,
90, 91–101.
Schlesinger C.A., Shine R. (1994) Choosing a rock: perspectives
of a bush-rock collector and a saxicolous lizard. Biological
Conservation, 67, 49–56.
Schoener T.W. (1985) Are lizard population sizes unusually
constant through time? The American Naturalist, 126(5),
633–641.
Schoener T.W. (1989) Food webs from the small to the large.
Ecology, 70(6), 1559–1589.
Schoener T.W., Schoener A. (1980) Densities, sex ratios and
population structure in four species of Bahamian Anolis liz-
ards. Journal of Animal Ecology, 49(1), 19–53.
Seber G.A.F. (1965) A note on the multiple-recapture census.
Biometrika, 52, 249–259.
Seber G.A.F. (1982) The Estimation of Animal Abundance and
Related Parameters, 2nd edn. Edward Arnold, London: 654
pp.
Shenbrot G., Krasnov B. (1997) Habitat relationships of the
lizard fauna in the Ramon erosion cirque, Negev highland
(Israel). Journal of Zoology, 241, 429–440.
Shine R., Webb J.K., Fitzgerald M., Summer J. (1998) The
impact of bush-rock removal on an endangered snake
species, Hoplocephalus bungaroides (Serpentes: Elapidae).
Wildlife Research, 25, 285–295.
Skalski J.R., Robson D.S. (1992) Techniques for Wildlife Investi-
gations: Design and Analysis of Capture Data. Academic
Press, San Diego. 237 pp
Smith G.R., Ballinger R.E. (2001) The ecological consequences
of habitat and microhabitat use in lizards: a review. Contem-
porary Herpetology, 3, 1–23.
Southwood T.R.E. (1978) Ecological Methods with particular
reference to the study of insect populations. Chapman and
Hall, London and New York: 524 pp.
Marine Ecology 29 (Suppl. 1) (2008) 2–11 ª 2008 The Authors. Journal compilation ª 2008 Blackwell Publishing Ltd
Environmental niche of the smut lizard population
Stamps J.A., Losos J.B., Andrews R.M. (1997) A compara-
tive study of population density and sexual size dimor-
phism in lizards. The American Naturalist, 149(1),
64–90.
Towns D.R., Neilson K.A., Whitaker A.H. (2002) North Island
Oligosoma spp. skink recovery plan. 2002–2012. Threatened
species recovery plan 48. DOC Science Publishing, Science &
Research Unit, Department of Conservation, Science Tech-
nology and Information Services, Wellington, New Zealand:
60 pp.
Tracy C.R., Christian K.A. (1986) Ecological relations among
space, time, and thermal niche axes. Ecology, 67(3), 609–
615.
Turner F.B., Hoddenbach G.A, Medica P.A., Lannom J.R.
(1970) The demography of the lizard, Uta stansburiana
Baird and Girard, in southern Nevada. Journal of Animal
Ecology, 39, 505–519.
Valido A., Nogales M. (1994) Frugivory and seed dispersal by
the lizard Gallotia galloti (Lacertidae) in a xeric habitat of
the Canary Islands. Oikos, 70, 403–411.
Valido A., Nogales M., Medina F.M. (2003) Fleshy fruits in the
diet of Canarian lizards Gallotia galloti (Lacertidae) in a
xeric habitat of the island of Tenerife. Journal of Herpetology,
37(4), 741–747.
Vega L.E., Bellagamba P.J., Fitzgerald L.A. (2000) Long-term
effects of anthropogenic habitat disturbance on a lizard
assemblage inhabiting coastal dunes in Argentina. Canadian
Journal of Zoology, 78, 1653–1660.
Vitt L.J., Avila-Pires T.C.S., Caldwell J.P. (1998) The impact of
individual tree harvesting on thermal environments of liz-
ards in Amazonian rain forest. Conservation Biology, 12(3),
654–664.
Webb J.K., Shine R. (2000) Paving the way for habitat restora-
tion: can artificial rocks restore degraded habitats of endan-
gered reptiles? Biological Conservation, 92, 93–99.
Wiederhecker H.C., Pinto A.C.S., Paiva M.S., Colli G.R. (2003)
The demography of the lizard Tropidurus torquatus (Squa-
mata, Tropiduridae) in a highly seasonal Neotropical
savanna. Phyllomedusa, 2(1), 9–19.
Woodbury A.M. (1956) Uses of marking animals in ecological
studies: marking amphibians and reptiles. Ecology, 37, 670–
674.
Xia X., Boonstra R. (1992) Measuring temporal variability of
population density: a critique. The American Naturalist,
140(5), 883–892.
Young K.V., Young A.T. (2000) Final Report: Scientific Study
of the Flat-tailed Horned Lizard, Phrynosoma mcallii. U.S.
Dep. of Navy Contracts N68711-95-LT-C0032, N68711-95-
LT-C0035: 72 pp. Also available at: http://bioweb.usu.edu/
flattailweb/
11