Morphologists have historically had to rely on destructive procedures to visualize the three‐dimensional (3‐D) anatomy of animals. More recently, however, non‐destructive techniques have come to the forefront. These include X‐ray computed tomography (CT), which has been used most commonly to examine the mineralized, hard‐tissue anatomy of living and fossil metazoans. One relatively new and potentially transformative aspect of current CT‐based research is the use of chemical agents to render visible, and differentiate between, soft‐tissue structures in X‐ray images. Specifically, iodine has emerged as one of the most widely used of these contrast agents among animal morphologists due to its ease of handling, cost effectiveness, and differential affinities for major types of soft tissues. The rapid adoption of iodine‐based contrast agents has resulted in a proliferation of distinct specimen preparations and scanning parameter choices, as well as an increasing variety of imaging hardware and software preferences. Here we provide a critical review of the recent contributions to iodine‐based, contrast‐enhanced CT research to enable researchers just beginning to employ contrast enhancement to make sense of this complex new landscape of methodologies. We provide a detailed summary of recent case studies, assess factors that govern success at each step of the specimen storage, preparation, and imaging processes, and make recommendations for standardizing both techniques and reporting practices. Finally, we discuss potential cutting‐edge applications of diffusible iodine‐based contrast‐enhanced computed tomography (diceCT) and the issues that must still be overcome to facilitate the broader adoption of diceCT going forward.

Exquisitely preserved fossil lizards from 99-million-year-old Burmese amber provide new insights into paleotropical diversity.

A detailed description of the skull and jaw of the gecko Sphaerodactylus roosevelti is presented. The bones are described articulated and isolated with special consideration given to the type of suture among joining elements. S. roosevelti was compared with 109 gekkotan species to evaluate the osteological variation and to find characters for cladistic analysis. Changes in the skull associated with the miniaturization process are discussed within the sphaerodactylid geckos. A noticeable increase of overlapping sutures was observed in the snout of the smallest sphaerodactylids compared to other gekkotans. This pattern is convergent with that in miniaturized pygopodids and may be attributed to adaptations for decreasing mechanical resistance of the cranium during feeding or burrowing. New cranial characters support Sphaerodactylinae as a monophyletic group and should be useful for resolving questions such as their relationship with other gekkotans.

Palearctic naked-toed geckos are a group of gekkonid geckos that range from North Africa to northern India and western China, with their greatest diversity in Iran and Pakistan. Relationships among the constituent genera remain incompletely resolved and the monophyly of key genera remains unverified. Further, competing classifications are in current use and many species have been allocated to different genera by different authors. We used both mitochondrial (ND2) and nuclear genes (RAG1, PDC) to explore relationships among representatives of all but one genus in the group (Rhinogecko), including four genera not previously included in phylogenetic analyses (Asiocolotes, Altigekko, Indogekko, and Siwaligekko). Siwaligekko (and presumably other Tibeto-Himalayan species often referred to Cyrtopodion) are more closely related to tropical Asian Cyrtodactylus than to Palearctic naked-toed geckos. Sampled species of Asiocolotes and Altigekko are sister taxa, but both genera are here considered junior subjective synonyms of Altiphylax. Cyrtopodion sensu lato is non-monophyletic; Mediodactylus and Tenuidactylus, which have variably been considered as subgenera or synonyms of Cyrtopodion are both valid genera. Indogekko is embedded within Cyrtopodion and is here treated as a subgenus. Bunopus and Crossobamon are closely related to one-another, and with Agamura are interdigitated among taxa previously assigned to Cyrtopodion. Our data confirm the previous identification of a Saharo-Arabian Stenodactylus/Tropiocolotes/Pseudoceramodactylus clade and verify that Microgecko and Alsophylax are not members of the main clade of Palearctic naked-toed geckos. Osteological differences between Tropiocolotes and Microgecko, formerly treated as congeneric, are discussed and illustrated. The divergence between Cyrtodactylus and the Palearctic naked-toed clade predates the initial collision of the Indian and Eurasian plates, but deeper divergences within both groups are consistent with mountain building in the Himalayas and adjacent ranges as promoting cladogenic events. Miocene divergences within Tenuidactylus are consistent with vicariant speciation caused by uplift events in the Iranian and Transcaspian regions. Taxonomic implications of our phylogenetic results are discussed and a preliminary allocation of all species of padless Palearctic gekkonids to genus is provided.

The enormous variation of the orbit in lepidosaurs is better conceptualized in terms of composition and configuration. Broadly, the orbit varies from having totally closed rim to being open posteriorly. Two processes are responsible for changes in the components of the circumorbital series, element loss and fusion. The resulting contacts among elements are the main factors determining orbital configuration. Here, we present a revision of the gekkotan circumorbital bones in the general context of the Lepidosauria. From observations of a sample of 105 species of gekkotans prepared using different techniques, we describe the main changes in the orbit and corroborate the presence or absence of some of the ambiguous elements such as the lacrimal and the jugal. The supraorbital bones of squamates are reviewed and some problems of homology are evaluated using recent phylogenenetic hypothesis. Anat Rec, 293:402-413, 2010. V V C 2009 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Comparative osteology of European lizards, and of European geckos in particular, is poorly known, resulting in problems when trying to determine to species isolated bones found as fossils or as remains of prey in scats or pellets. In order to partly solve this issue, we here present a detailed comparative analysis of the cranial bones of the four most broadly distributed species of European gekkotans: Euleptes europaea, Hemidactylus turcicus, Mediodactylus kotschyi and Tarentola mauritanica. The skulls of these species display both a set of features that are typical for geckos in general and unique features that can be employed to identify isolated bones of all considered species. Diagnostic differences are found in almost every bone (except the squamosal, epipterygoid and stapes), leading to the creation of a detailed diagnostic key. The dentition also displays some interspecific differences, even though all four species share a similar general tooth morphology, with pleurodont teeth provided with two parallel cutting edges separated by a groove-like space. Such a dentition is consistent with an arthropod-based diet.

Gekkota is often interpreted as sister to all remaining squamates, exclusive of dibamids, or as sister to Autarchoglossa. It is the only diverse lineage of primarily nocturnal lizards and includes some of the smallest amniotes. The skeleton of geckos has often been interpreted as paedomorphic and/or “primitive” but these lizards also display a wide range of structural specializations of the postcranium, including modifications associated with both scansorial locomotion and limb reduction. Although the concept of “Gekkota” has been variously applied by different authors, we here apply a rigorous apomorphy based definition, recent advances in gekkotan morphology and phylogenetics, and diverse comparative material to provide a comprehensive assessment of 28 known pre‐Quaternary geckos, updating the last such review, published three decades ago. Fossils evaluated include both sedimentary fossils and amber‐embedded specimens. Known Cretaceous geckos are exclusively Asian and exhibit character combinations not seen in any living forms. Cenozoic gekkotans derive from sites around the world, although Europe is especially well represented. Paleogene geckos are largely known from disarticulated remains and show similarities to Sphaerodactylidae and Diplodactylidae, although resemblances may be plesiomorphic in some cases. Many Neogene gekkotans are referable to living families or even genera, but their geographic occurrences are often extralimital to those of modern groups, as is consistent with paleoclimatic conditions. The phylogenetic placement of fossil gekkotans has important repercusions for timetree calibration, but at present only a small number of fossils can be confidently assigned to even family level groupings, limiting their utility in this regard. Anat Rec, 297:433–462, 2014. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Gekkota is often interpreted as sister to all remaining squamates, exclusive of dibamids, or as sister to Autarchoglossa. It is the only diverse lineage of primarily nocturnal lizards and includes some of the smallest amniotes. The skeleton of geckos has often been interpreted as paedomorphic and/or "primitive" but these lizards also display a wide range of structural specializations of the postcranium, including modifications associated with both scansorial locomotion and limb reduction. Although the concept of "Gekkota" has been variously applied by different authors, we here apply a rigorous apomorphy based definition, recent advances in gekkotan morphology and phylogenetics, and diverse comparative material to provide a comprehensive assessment of 28 known pre-Quaternary geckos, updating the last such review, published three decades ago. Fossils evaluated include both sedimentary fossils and amber-embedded specimens. Known Cretaceous geckos are exclusively Asian and exhibit character combinations not seen in any living forms. Cenozoic gekkotans derive from sites around the world, although Europe is especially well represented. Paleogene geckos are largely known from disarticulated remains and show similarities to Sphaerodactylidae and Diplodactylidae, although resemblances may be plesiomorphic in some cases. Many Neogene gekkotans are referable to living families or even genera, but their geographic occurrences are often extralimital to those of modern groups, as is consistent with paleoclimatic conditions. The phylogenetic placement of fossil gekkotans has important repercusions for timetree calibration, but at present only a small number of fossils can be confidently assigned to even family level groupings, limiting their utility in this regard. Anat Rec,