Chaitzam's Ameiva

Please note the thumbnail is not a Chaitzam's ameiva but an Argentine black and white tegu

In the forests of northern Guatemala and the southern Mexican state of Chiapas, there exists a species of lizard known as Chaitzam's Ameiva Holcosus chaitzami. Not a huge amount of information is available on them, due to the limited number of specimens collected and none within the past few decades. As a result, the IUCN lists them as 'data deficient' with regards to their conservation status, and their geographic range and population trends are poorly understood. The little information we have is based on the specimens themselves and the locations they were found in, such as physical descriptions and the kind of habitat and elevation we would expect to find them in. The species is classified in the lizard family Teiidae, the members of which are usually referred to as tegus, whiptails, racerunners, and in this case, ameivas. Measuring at just 8cm from snout to vent, they are relatively small as far as their genus goes, and like most lizards they are oviparous. So this all seems fairly normal; just a regular old tropical lizard with nothing too out of the ordinary. But what intrigues me the most about this species is not to do with their biology, behaviour or ecology. There is something else about them that has piqued my interest, and made this small, green reptile stand out to me amongst all the others.

Having been described in 1942 by the American herpetologist Lawrence Cooper Stuart, the then newly discovered species was given the specific name chaitzami. Specific names are the second word in a species' scientific name, as opposed to the generic name which comes first, and are most commonly named after a person, place or a word describing said species usually in Greek or Latin. It was initially assigned to the genus Ameiva by Stuart, only to be reassigned to the genus Holcosus in 2012 by herpetologists Michael Harvey, Gabriel Ugueto and Ronald Gutberlet Jr. a good 70 years later. Members of both genera are referred to as 'ameivas' in their common names, a word believed to come from the indigenous Tupi language of Brazil, considered to be of unknown etymology but possibly meaning 'lizards that are not fit to eat'. 'Holcosus', on the other hand, is thought to have been based on the Greek word 'holkos', meaning a type of grain, probably referring to the grain-like keeled scales found on the frontal region of the heads. These etymologies are based on descriptions and so seem pretty normal, as does almost every other one that I have come across in zoological nomenclature. Therefore it is not these that intrigue me, but the specific name that Stuart gave these lizards, that being chaitzami.

By the rules of binomial nomenclature, a specific name which is named in honour of a person is written as said person's name followed by the letter 'i'. A good example of this is the freshwater crocodile, described by Gerard Krefft, but named after native Australian police officer and amateur naturalist Robert Arthur Johnstone, hence the scientific name of Crocodylus johnstoni. Lawrence Cooper Stuart himself even had six species named in honour of him, having stuarti as specific names. Now the species we are discussing was named chaitzami, indicating that it was named after someone with the name 'Chaitzam', this word also being part of the common name 'Chaitzam's ameiva'. Biologists often include an etymology of the scientific name in their written description, this species being no exception, and this is where it begins to get interesting. The etymology Stuart gave us is as follows: "Dedicated to Chaitzam, the mountain lord who dominates the lower Cahabón Valley". I will say it again. "Dedicated to Chaitzam, the mountain lord who dominates the lower Cahabón Valley". No further explanation or identification was given, just that it was named after someone called 'Chaitzam', confirming the specific name, and that he was a "mountain lord" as he puts it, who "dominates the lower Cahabón Valley". Now here is the thing, there is not a single person alive today who has even a faint clue as to what on earth he was referring to when he said this.

So we have discussed a lot about the lizard, but what do we know about the person who first identified and named it? Well as we have mentioned, he was an American herpetologist, meaning he specifically specialised in reptiles and amphibians. He also worked at the University of Michigan. During his career, he described around 27 species between 1934 and 1954, most of which were either snakes, frogs or salamanders. Only four were lizards, those being two anoles, one skink and the ameiva. One of these, the Hague's anole Anolis haguei, Stuart named after Henry Hague, an estate manager and collector, in 1942, which was the exact same year he named Chaitzam's ameiva. Both lizards were also collected from the same department of Guatemala, that being Alta Verapaz. This I find particularly interesting, that these two new species were from the same region, described at the same time, probably even collected on the same trip, and yet one was named after a real person whom Stuart possibly knew or at least knew of, and the other is this unknown being named 'Chaitzam'. The obvious solution to the problem is to ask him who this Chaitzam is, but alas, Stuart was born way back in 1907 and died in 1983 at the age of 75-76. Does this mean then that the true identity of Chaitzam is forever lost to history, a mystery that cannot and will never be solved? What is really puzzling to me is how 41 years had passed since he first wrote down the name and when he died, that the taxonomy was reviewed by four other scientists during his life, and how no one thought to ask him what he meant when he said 'dedicated to Chaitzam'.

One of the main things that stand out to me about Stuart's provided etymology was the location given, which is the 'lower Cahabón Valley'. He described the type locality, the place where the first specimen was found, as "along Cahabón–Coban trail about 2 km N Finca Canihor". The Cahabón–Coban trail connects the towns of Coban and Cahabón, and is roughly 2km north of Finca Canihor, which is a farm on the Cahabón River. From my research, I could not find anything specifically called the 'Cahabón Valley', just the river with that name, which does flows through northern Guatemala where the species was discovered. Looking at topographic maps, I could see that the river does flow between areas of around 1,200m elevation just before it drains into the Lago de Izabal. I would assume then that this is the valley he meant, considering its proximity to the type location. The nearby Sierra de las Minas at 3,000m, said to be the source of the river, could explain the 'mountain lord', as these areas of elevation do overlook the valley, also being closer to the end of the river or the 'lower' valley. The word 'lord' implies Chaitzam is in a position of power, however the definition of 'lord', despite primarily being a formal title of a man of noble rank, can also refer to any ruler or master. This means he could be anyone from a tribal chief to a worshipped deity, therefore this word gives us limited insight. One of the other peculiar things I noticed was the use of the word 'dominates'. Not 'dominated' or 'dominating', but 'dominates' in the present simple tense, implying he was expected to continue indefinitely and was not to become a past event from the perspective of future readers. I believe this could put into question the idea of Chaitzam being a human but rather an eternal being who will reign forever, or he could simply have just been using that tense as he was dominating at the time it was written, even with the potential of it being misleading.

This is one of those mysteries that has been bothering me ever since I first discovered it, however it is one that very few know about, so I cannot imagine many people trying to solve it, mainly because of its obscurity and relative unimportance and the little there is to go off. Nonetheless it has certainly gained my interest. I just like to see it as an interesting hidden gem from history, one that hardly anyone will see, and not even a nice looking one but one covered in an unbreakable outer layer such that no one will ever get to see the beauty of the colours within. But on the other hand, there is the possibility that the answer is not actually as exciting as I am imagining it to be, so it could even be argued that it is better to keep it unknown, as unsolved mysteries like these are what really makes history interesting and that in itself is the beauty of it. I hope that by writing this blog I may bring this to light so others can share my fascination, and that more people will lose great amounts of sleep wondering who this mysterious being 'Chaitzam' is that Lawrence Cooper Stuart named a lizard after in 1942.