CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
EN/FR
Search
Menu
Research dossier · Science & Nature

Lepidodactylus mitchelli

species of reptile

Specimen drawers, botanical folios and brass scientific instruments under study light
Science and natureInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionSep 12, 2026
Entity authorityQ81526309 ↗
Source-derived summary

Lepidodactylus mitchelli is a species of gecko. It is endemic to Papua New Guinea; the type locality is Boiaboiawaga Island in Milne Bay Province in the east of the country. The species was described in 2019 by Edward Kraus, and is named after his friend David Mitchell.

Editorial summary

This brief starts where responsible research should: with the source description of “Lepidodactylus mitchelli” as species of reptile. Everything that follows is an evidence route, not borrowed authority.

Editorial reviewUseful for establishing the present vocabulary of the subject while preserving a route back to the evidence on which that vocabulary rests. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—2019—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. The account is most persuasive where Lepidodactylus, mitchelli and species can be independently traced.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

The subject matters to the science & nature register because the source frames it as species of reptile. Its deeper value depends on whether names, dates, institutions and citations support that framing.

Evidence profile

The date and method of observation matter as much as the stated conclusion, especially where classification or consensus has changed. The source revision retrieved here is dated Sep 12, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q81526309. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 2019.

Critical limits

A general summary may omit uncertainty, sample limits or methodological disagreement that is explicit in the technical record. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Check terminology, classification and the date of the cited evidence. Scientific names and technical consensus can change while older records retain historical value.

Best used for
  • Current terminology
  • Classification context
  • Finding cited technical literature
Verify next

Primary datasets, specimen catalogues, standards bodies and the most recent peer-reviewed literature.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Lepidodactylus mitchelli”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Lepidodactylus mitchelli primary sources, Lepidodactylus mitchelli archive and Lepidodactylus research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Lepidodactylus mitchelli”?
  2. Is the terminology current, historical or disputed?
  3. Which observation, specimen, dataset or publication supports the account?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “Lepidodactylus mitchelli” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.