DOCSLIB.ORG

Systematic Conservation Planning for West African Snakes: a Comparison of Methods

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Systematic Conservation Planning for West African Snakes: a Comparison of Methods Systematic conservation planning for West African snakes: A comparison of methods Matthew Nuttall September 2012 Supervisors: Dr David Orme and Dr Neil Burgess A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science and the diploma of Imperial College London 1 “Conservation planning is not for the faint of heart” - Reed F. Noss 2 Abstract.................................................................................................................................7 Acknowledgements............................................................................................................ 8 1. INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................... 9 1.1 Research focus............................................................................................................... 10 1.2 Relevance of the study................................................................................................. 11 1.3 Aims and objectives...................................................................................................... 11 2. BACKGROUND.............................................................................................................. 13 2.1 Systematic conservation planning.............................................................................. 13 2.1.1 Development of systematic conservation planning................................. 13 2.1.2 Current theory................................................................................................ 15 2.1.3 Terminology.................................................................................................... 16 2.1.4 Application..................................................................................................... 18 2.2 Species range estimation.............................................................................................. 18 2.2.1 Minimum convex hulls................................................................................. 18 2.2.2 Species distribution models......................................................................... 19 2.2.3 Kernel estimators........................................................................................... 21 2.3 Snakes............................................................................................................................. 23 2.3.1 Overview of snake ecology and biology.................................................... 23 2.3.2 West African snakes and their conservation............................................. 24 2.4 Study area.......................................................................................................................25 3. METHODS....................................................................................................................... 27 3.1 Data................................................................................................................................. 27 3.1.1 Distribution data............................................................................................ 27 3.1.2 Protected area data.........................................................................................28 3 3.2 Range estimation.......................................................................................................... 28 3.2.1 Point data........................................................................................................ 28 3.2.2 Minimum convex hulls................................................................................. 28 3.2.3 Kernel analyses............................................................................................... 29 3.3 Systematic conservation planning.............................................................................. 31 3.3.1 Cost...................................................................................................................31 3.3.2 Boundary length modifier............................................................................ 31 3.3.3 Existing protected areas................................................................................ 34 3.3.4 Species targets.................................................................................................34 3.3.5 Species penalty factor.................................................................................... 35 3.3.6 Running Marxan............................................................................................ 36 3.3.7 The objective function................................................................................... 36 3.4 Sensitivity analyses of the network solutions to the different methods............... 37 3.4.1 Efficiency of reserve networks................................................................................. 37 3.4.2 Similarity of selected planning units....................................................................... 37 3.4.3 Compactness............................................................................................................... 38 4. RESULTS.......................................................................................................................... 39 4.1 Comparison of outputs................................................................................................ 39 4.1.1 Raw attributes................................................................................................. 39 4.1.2 Efficiency and compactness.......................................................................... 41 4.2 Consent on irreplaceability.......................................................................................... 42 4.3 Representation of snakes in current reserve networks............................................ .47 5. DISCUSSION................................................................................................................... 49 5.1 Marxan outputs evaluation......................................................................................... 49 4 5.1.1 Raw and computed outputs......................................................................... 49 5.1.2 Consent on irreplaceability........................................................................... 50 5.2 Conservation priority areas for West African snakes.............................................. 52 5.3 Are snakes represented in existing protected area networks?............................... 53 5.4 Methodological notes and limitations....................................................................... 54 5.4.1 Species distribution models versus kernel estimators.............................. 54 5.4.2 Kernel analyses – Least-square cross validation versus href................... 56 5.4.3 Marxan............................................................................................................. 57 5.4.3.1 Cost................................................................................................... 57 5.4.3.2 Setting targets.................................................................................. 57 5.4.3.3 Boundary length modifier............................................................. 58 5.4.4 Using historic data......................................................................................... 58 5.5 Concluding remarks..................................................................................................... 59 6. REFERENCES.................................................................................................................. 61 7. APPENDICES.................................................................................................................. 70 A1.............................................................................................................................. 670 A2.............................................................................................................................. 76 5 LIST OF ACRONYMS BLM – Boundary length modifier CLUZ - Conservation Land-Use Zoning CITES – Convention on the International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora FAO – Food and Agricultural Organisation GEF – Global Environment Facility GIS – Geographic information system HII – Global Human Influence Index Dataset ILP – Integer linear programming IUCN – International Union for the Conservation of Nature LSCV – Least-square cross validation MCH – Minimum convex hull PA – Protected Area PARCC – Protected Areas Resilient to Climate Change PU – Planning unit SCP – Systematic conservation planning SDM – Species distribution model SPF – Species penalty factor UNEP – United Nations Environment Programme WCMC – World Conservation Monitoring Centre 6 ABSTRACT Protected areas are the cornerstone of conservation efforts to reduce the rate of biodiversity loss. In the past protected areas have been created for reasons other than the conservation of habitats and species, and today their placement still falls victim to opportunity costs and land-use competition. Systematic conservation planning is a field of research that is changing this trend. Using mathematical and statistical methods developed over the last few decades, planners are now able to design entire networks that meet quantitative and pre-determined conservation targets with minimal costs and optimised efficiency. This study applied systematic conservation planning to West African snake species, which have lacked
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Note Sur Une Collection De Serpents Du Congo Avec Description D'une Espèce Nouvelle
    .I ', * I L Note sur une collection de serpents du Congo avec description d'une espèce nouvelle Jean François WE'& Rolande ROUX-ESTEVE Trape, J. F. & Roux - Estève, R. 1990. Note sur une collection de serpents du Congo avec description d'une espèce nouvelle. J. Afr. Zool. 104 : 375-383. On a collection of snakesfrom the Congo, &th description of a neu, species.- Philothamnus , hughest nsp. is described from Gangahgolo, Congo. This new species ranges from Cameroun to Gabon, Central African Republic and North Zaïre; it was previously mistaken for Phoplogaster.Six species are recorded for the fmt time in the Congo : Rhino&ohlops caecus, Chamaelycus christyt, Chamaelycus parkeri, Philothamnus nitidus loveridgei, Aparallactus modestus ubang- and Paranaja multifadata anomala. Specimens of two rare species are described: Miodon fulvicollts and Bouletgerlna christyt. Philothamnus hughest n. sp. est décrit de Gangalingolo au Congo. Cette espèce était précédemment confondue avec P. hoplogaster. Son aire de répartition géographique s' étend du Cameroun au Gabon, B la RCA et au Nord du Zaïre. Si espèces sont rapportées pour la première fois du Congo: Rhinotyphlops caecus, Chamaelycuschristyf, Chamaelycusparkeri, Philothamnus nitidus loueridgel, Aparallactus modestus ubangensis et Paranaja multifasclata anomala. Des exemplaires de deux espèces rares sont décrits : Miodon .f2luicollis et Boulengerina christyt. Key words : Snakes, Africa, Congo, Philothamnus hughest. J. F. Tra e, ORSTOM, B.P.1386,Dakar, Sénégal. - R. Roux-Estève, Muséum National d'Histoire Natureg, 25 rue Cuvier, F-75005 Paris, France. INTRODUCI'ION MNHP 1987-1670: Dimonika (Ma- yombe), Q . Capturé le 1-6-1981. Nous présentons dans cette note une description des spécimens les plus Longueur totale: 340 mm, longueur remarquables d'une collection de 750 de la queue: 5 mm.
    [Show full text]
  • Controlled Animals
    Environment and Sustainable Resource Development Fish and Wildlife Policy Division Controlled Animals Wildlife Regulation, Schedule 5, Part 1-4: Controlled Animals Subject to the Wildlife Act, a person must not be in possession of a wildlife or controlled animal unless authorized by a permit to do so, the animal was lawfully acquired, was lawfully exported from a jurisdiction outside of Alberta and was lawfully imported into Alberta. NOTES: 1 Animals listed in this Schedule, as a general rule, are described in the left hand column by reference to common or descriptive names and in the right hand column by reference to scientific names. But, in the event of any conflict as to the kind of animals that are listed, a scientific name in the right hand column prevails over the corresponding common or descriptive name in the left hand column. 2 Also included in this Schedule is any animal that is the hybrid offspring resulting from the crossing, whether before or after the commencement of this Schedule, of 2 animals at least one of which is or was an animal of a kind that is a controlled animal by virtue of this Schedule. 3 This Schedule excludes all wildlife animals, and therefore if a wildlife animal would, but for this Note, be included in this Schedule, it is hereby excluded from being a controlled animal. Part 1 Mammals (Class Mammalia) 1. AMERICAN OPOSSUMS (Family Didelphidae) Virginia Opossum Didelphis virginiana 2. SHREWS (Family Soricidae) Long-tailed Shrews Genus Sorex Arboreal Brown-toothed Shrew Episoriculus macrurus North American Least Shrew Cryptotis parva Old World Water Shrews Genus Neomys Ussuri White-toothed Shrew Crocidura lasiura Greater White-toothed Shrew Crocidura russula Siberian Shrew Crocidura sibirica Piebald Shrew Diplomesodon pulchellum 3.
    [Show full text]
  • Setting Conservation Priorities for the Moroccan Herpetofauna: the Utility of Regional Red Listing
    Oryx—The International Journal of Conservation Setting conservation priorities for the Moroccan herpetofauna: the utility of regional red listing J uan M. Pleguezuelos,JosE´ C. Brito,Soum´I A F ahd,Mo´ nica F eriche J osE´ A. Mateo,Gregorio M oreno-Rueda,Ricardo R eques and X avier S antos Appendix 1 Nomenclatural and taxonomical combinations scovazzi (Zangari et al., 2006) for amphibians. Chalcides for the Moroccan (Western Sahara included) amphibians lanzai (Caputo & Mellado, 1992), Leptotyphlops algeriensis and reptiles for which there are potential problems re- (Hahn & Wallach, 1998), Macroprotodon brevis (Carranza garding taxonomic combinations; species names are fol- et al., 2004) and Telescopus guidimakaensis (Bo¨hme et al., lowed by reference to publications that support these 1989) for reptiles are considered here as full species. Macro- combinations. The complete list of species is in Appendix 2. protodon abubakeri has been recently described for the Agama impalearis (Joger, 1991), Tarentola chazaliae region (Carranza et al., 2004) and Hemidactylus angulatus (Carranza et al., 2002), Chalcides boulengeri, Chalcides recently found within the limits of the study area (Carranza delislei, Chalcides sphenopsiformis (Carranza et al., 2008), & Arnold, 2006). Filtering was not applied to species of Timon tangitanus, Atlantolacerta andreanszkyi, Podarcis passive introduction into Morocco, such as Hemidactylus vaucheri, Scelarcis perspicillata (Arnold et al., 2007), turcicus and Hemidactylus angulatus. The three-toed skink Hyalosaurus koellikeri
    [Show full text]
  • A Molecular Phylogeny of the Lamprophiidae Fitzinger (Serpentes, Caenophidia)
    Zootaxa 1945: 51–66 (2008) ISSN 1175-5326 (print edition) www.mapress.com/zootaxa/ ZOOTAXA Copyright © 2008 · Magnolia Press ISSN 1175-5334 (online edition) Dissecting the major African snake radiation: a molecular phylogeny of the Lamprophiidae Fitzinger (Serpentes, Caenophidia) NICOLAS VIDAL1,10, WILLIAM R. BRANCH2, OLIVIER S.G. PAUWELS3,4, S. BLAIR HEDGES5, DONALD G. BROADLEY6, MICHAEL WINK7, CORINNE CRUAUD8, ULRICH JOGER9 & ZOLTÁN TAMÁS NAGY3 1UMR 7138, Systématique, Evolution, Adaptation, Département Systématique et Evolution, C. P. 26, Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle, 43 Rue Cuvier, Paris 75005, France. E-mail: [email protected] 2Bayworld, P.O. Box 13147, Humewood 6013, South Africa. E-mail: [email protected] 3 Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences, Rue Vautier 29, B-1000 Brussels, Belgium. E-mail: [email protected], [email protected] 4Smithsonian Institution, Center for Conservation Education and Sustainability, B.P. 48, Gamba, Gabon. 5Department of Biology, 208 Mueller Laboratory, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802-5301 USA. E-mail: [email protected] 6Biodiversity Foundation for Africa, P.O. Box FM 730, Bulawayo, Zimbabwe. E-mail: [email protected] 7 Institute of Pharmacy and Molecular Biotechnology, University of Heidelberg, INF 364, D-69120 Heidelberg, Germany. E-mail: [email protected] 8Centre national de séquençage, Genoscope, 2 rue Gaston-Crémieux, CP5706, 91057 Evry cedex, France. E-mail: www.genoscope.fr 9Staatliches Naturhistorisches Museum, Pockelsstr. 10, 38106 Braunschweig, Germany. E-mail: [email protected] 10Corresponding author Abstract The Elapoidea includes the Elapidae and a large (~60 genera, 280 sp.) and mostly African (including Madagascar) radia- tion termed Lamprophiidae by Vidal et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Checklist Reptile and Amphibian
    To report sightings, contact: Natural Resources Coordinator 980-314-1119 www.parkandrec.com REPTILE AND AMPHIBIAN CHECKLIST Mecklenburg County, NC: 66 species Mole Salamanders ☐ Pickerel Frog ☐ Ground Skink (Scincella lateralis) ☐ Spotted Salamander (Rana (Lithobates) palustris) Whiptails (Ambystoma maculatum) ☐ Southern Leopard Frog ☐ Six-lined Racerunner ☐ Marbled Salamander (Rana (Lithobates) sphenocephala (Aspidoscelis sexlineata) (Ambystoma opacum) (sphenocephalus)) Nonvenomous Snakes Lungless Salamanders Snapping Turtles ☐ Eastern Worm Snake ☐ Dusky Salamander (Desmognathus fuscus) ☐ Common Snapping Turtle (Carphophis amoenus) ☐ Southern Two-lined Salamander (Chelydra serpentina) ☐ Scarlet Snake1 (Cemophora coccinea) (Eurycea cirrigera) Box and Water Turtles ☐ Black Racer (Coluber constrictor) ☐ Three-lined Salamander ☐ Northern Painted Turtle ☐ Ring-necked Snake (Eurycea guttolineata) (Chrysemys picta) (Diadophis punctatus) ☐ Spring Salamander ☐ Spotted Turtle2, 6 (Clemmys guttata) ☐ Corn Snake (Pantherophis guttatus) (Gyrinophilus porphyriticus) ☐ River Cooter (Pseudemys concinna) ☐ Rat Snake (Pantherophis alleghaniensis) ☐ Slimy Salamander (Plethodon glutinosus) ☐ Eastern Box Turtle (Terrapene carolina) ☐ Eastern Hognose Snake ☐ Mud Salamander (Pseudotriton montanus) ☐ Yellow-bellied Slider (Trachemys scripta) (Heterodon platirhinos) ☐ Red Salamander (Pseudotriton ruber) ☐ Red-eared Slider3 ☐ Mole Kingsnake Newts (Trachemys scripta elegans) (Lampropeltis calligaster) ☐ Red-spotted Newt Mud and Musk Turtles ☐ Eastern Kingsnake
    [Show full text]
  • Genus Lycodon)
    Zoologica Scripta Multilocus phylogeny reveals unexpected diversification patterns in Asian wolf snakes (genus Lycodon) CAMERON D. SILER,CARL H. OLIVEROS,ANSSI SANTANEN &RAFE M. BROWN Submitted: 6 September 2012 Siler, C. D., Oliveros, C. H., Santanen, A., Brown, R. M. (2013). Multilocus phylogeny Accepted: 8 December 2012 reveals unexpected diversification patterns in Asian wolf snakes (genus Lycodon). —Zoologica doi:10.1111/zsc.12007 Scripta, 42, 262–277. The diverse group of Asian wolf snakes of the genus Lycodon represents one of many poorly understood radiations of advanced snakes in the superfamily Colubroidea. Outside of three species having previously been represented in higher-level phylogenetic analyses, nothing is known of the relationships among species in this unique, moderately diverse, group. The genus occurs widely from central to Southeast Asia, and contains both widespread species to forms that are endemic to small islands. One-third of the diversity is found in the Philippine archipelago. Both morphological similarity and highly variable diagnostic characters have contributed to confusion over species-level diversity. Additionally, the placement of the genus among genera in the subfamily Colubrinae remains uncertain, although previous studies have supported a close relationship with the genus Dinodon. In this study, we provide the first estimate of phylogenetic relationships within the genus Lycodon using a new multi- locus data set. We provide statistical tests of monophyly based on biogeographic, morpho- logical and taxonomic hypotheses. With few exceptions, we are able to reject many of these hypotheses, indicating a need for taxonomic revisions and a reconsideration of the group's biogeography. Mapping of color patterns on our preferred phylogenetic tree suggests that banded and blotched types have evolved on multiple occasions in the history of the genus, whereas the solid-color (and possibly speckled) morphotype color patterns evolved only once.
    [Show full text]
  • The Herpetofauna of the Cubango, Cuito, and Lower Cuando River Catchments of South-Eastern Angola
    Official journal website: Amphibian & Reptile Conservation amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 10(2) [Special Section]: 6–36 (e126). The herpetofauna of the Cubango, Cuito, and lower Cuando river catchments of south-eastern Angola 1,2,*Werner Conradie, 2Roger Bills, and 1,3William R. Branch 1Port Elizabeth Museum (Bayworld), P.O. Box 13147, Humewood 6013, SOUTH AFRICA 2South African Institute for Aquatic Bio- diversity, P/Bag 1015, Grahamstown 6140, SOUTH AFRICA 3Research Associate, Department of Zoology, P O Box 77000, Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University, Port Elizabeth 6031, SOUTH AFRICA Abstract.—Angola’s herpetofauna has been neglected for many years, but recent surveys have revealed unknown diversity and a consequent increase in the number of species recorded for the country. Most historical Angola surveys focused on the north-eastern and south-western parts of the country, with the south-east, now comprising the Kuando-Kubango Province, neglected. To address this gap a series of rapid biodiversity surveys of the upper Cubango-Okavango basin were conducted from 2012‒2015. This report presents the results of these surveys, together with a herpetological checklist of current and historical records for the Angolan drainage of the Cubango, Cuito, and Cuando Rivers. In summary 111 species are known from the region, comprising 38 snakes, 32 lizards, five chelonians, a single crocodile and 34 amphibians. The Cubango is the most western catchment and has the greatest herpetofaunal diversity (54 species). This is a reflection of both its easier access, and thus greatest number of historical records, and also the greater habitat and topographical diversity associated with the rocky headwaters.
    [Show full text]
  • Journal of the East Africa Natural History Society and National Museum
    JOURNAL OF THE EAST AFRICA NATURAL HISTORY SOCIETY AND NATIONAL MUSEUM 15 October, 1978 Vol. 31 No. 167 A CHECKLIST OF mE SNAKES OF KENYA Stephen Spawls 35 WQodland Rise, Muswell Hill, London NIO, England ABSTRACT Loveridge (1957) lists 161 species and subspecies of snake from East Mrica. Eighty-nine of these belonging to some 41 genera were recorded from Kenya. The new list contains some 106 forms of 46 genera. - Three full species have been deleted from Loveridge's original checklist. Typhlops b. blanfordii has been synonymised with Typhlops I. lineolatus, Typhlops kaimosae has been synonymised with Typhlops angolensis (Roux-Esteve 1974) and Co/uber citeroii has been synonymised with Meizodon semiornatus (Lanza 1963). Of the 20 forms added to the list, 12 are forms collected for the first time in Kenya but occurring outside its political boundaries and one, Atheris desaixi is a new species, the holotype and paratypes being collected within Kenya. There has also been a large number of changes amongst the 89 original species as a result of revisionary systematic studies. This accounts for the other additions to the list. INTRODUCTION The most recent checklist dealing with the snakes of Kenya is Loveridge (1957). Since that date there has been a significant number of developments in the Kenyan herpetological field. This paper intends to update the nomenclature in the part of the checklist that concerns the snakes of Kenya and to extend the list to include all the species now known to occur within the political boundaries of Kenya. It also provides the range of each species within Kenya with specific locality records .
    [Show full text]
  • Carr, J. 2015. Species Monitoring Recommendations for The
    Communication Strategy (PARCC Activity 4.2) Ver. 1. Protected Areas Resilient to Climate Change, PARCC West Africa 2015 Species monitoring recommendations for Niumi Saloum National Park (the Gambia) and Delta du Saloum National Park (Senegal) ENGLISH Jamie Carr IUCN Global Species Programme 2015 Species monitoring recommendations: Niumi - Saloum. The United Nations Environment Programme World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP-WCMC) is the specialist biodiversity assessment centre of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), the world’s foremost intergovernmental environmental organisation. The Centre has been in operation for over 30 years, combining scientific research with practical policy advice. Species monitoring recommendations for Niumi Saloum National Park (the Gambia) and Delta du Saloum National Park (Senegal), prepared by Jamie Carr, with funding from Global Environment Facility (GEF) via UNEP. Copyright: 2015. United Nations Environment Programme. Reproduction This publication may be reproduced for educational or non-profit purposes without special permission, provided acknowledgement to the source is made. Reuse of any figures is subject to permission from the original rights holders. No use of this publication may be made for resale or any other commercial purpose without permission in writing from UNEP. Applications for permission, with a statement of purpose and extent of reproduction, should be sent to the Director, DCPI, UNEP, P.O. Box 30552, Nairobi, Kenya. Disclaimer: The contents of this report do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of UNEP, contributory organisations or editors. The designations employed and the presentations of material in this report do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of UNEP or contributory organisations, editors or publishers concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city area or its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries or the designation of its name, frontiers or boundaries.
    [Show full text]
  • Snakes of the Everglades Agricultural Area1 Michelle L
    CIR1462 Snakes of the Everglades Agricultural Area1 Michelle L. Casler, Elise V. Pearlstine, Frank J. Mazzotti, and Kenneth L. Krysko2 Background snakes are often escapees or are released deliberately and illegally by owners who can no longer care for them. Snakes are members of the vertebrate order Squamata However, there has been no documentation of these snakes (suborder Serpentes) and are most closely related to lizards breeding in the EAA (Tennant 1997). (suborder Sauria). All snakes are legless and have elongated trunks. They can be found in a variety of habitats and are able to climb trees; swim through streams, lakes, or oceans; Benefits of Snakes and move across sand or through leaf litter in a forest. Snakes are an important part of the environment and play Often secretive, they rely on scent rather than vision for a role in keeping the balance of nature. They aid in the social and predatory behaviors. A snake’s skull is highly control of rodents and invertebrates. Also, some snakes modified and has a great degree of flexibility, called cranial prey on other snakes. The Florida kingsnake (Lampropeltis kinesis, that allows it to swallow prey much larger than its getula floridana), for example, prefers snakes as prey and head. will even eat venomous species. Snakes also provide a food source for other animals such as birds and alligators. Of the 45 snake species (70 subspecies) that occur through- out Florida, 23 may be found in the Everglades Agricultural Snake Conservation Area (EAA). Of the 23, only four are venomous. The venomous species that may occur in the EAA are the coral Loss of habitat is the most significant problem facing many snake (Micrurus fulvius fulvius), Florida cottonmouth wildlife species in Florida, snakes included.
    [Show full text]
  • Ancestral Reconstruction of Diet and Fang Condition in the Lamprophiidae: Implications for the Evolution of Venom Systems in Snakes
    Journal of Herpetology, Vol. 55, No. 1, 1–10, 2021 Copyright 2021 Society for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles Ancestral Reconstruction of Diet and Fang Condition in the Lamprophiidae: Implications for the Evolution of Venom Systems in Snakes 1,2 1 1 HIRAL NAIK, MIMMIE M. KGADITSE, AND GRAHAM J. ALEXANDER 1School of Animal, Plant and Environmental Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg. PO Wits, 2050, Gauteng, South Africa ABSTRACT.—The Colubroidea includes all venomous and some nonvenomous snakes, many of which have extraordinary dental morphology and functional capabilities. It has been proposed that the ancestral condition of the Colubroidea is venomous with tubular fangs. The venom system includes the production of venomous secretions by labial glands in the mouth and usually includes fangs for effective delivery of venom. Despite significant research on the evolution of the venom system in snakes, limited research exists on the driving forces for different fang and dental morphology at a broader phylogenetic scale. We assessed the patterns of fang and dental condition in the Lamprophiidae, a speciose family of advanced snakes within the Colubroidea, and we related fang and dental condition to diet. The Lamprophiidae is the only snake family that includes front-fanged, rear-fanged, and fangless species. We produced an ancestral reconstruction for the family and investigated the pattern of diet and fangs within the clade. We concluded that the ancestral lamprophiid was most likely rear-fanged and that the shift in dental morphology was associated with changes in diet. This pattern indicates that fang loss, and probably venom loss, has occurred multiple times within the Lamprophiidae.
    [Show full text]
  • Biogeography of the Reptiles of the Central African Republic
    African Journal of Herpetology, 2006 55(1): 23-59. ©Herpetological Association of Africa Original article Biogeography of the Reptiles of the Central African Republic LAURENT CHIRIO AND IVAN INEICH Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle Département de Systématique et Evolution (Reptiles) – USM 602, Case Postale 30, 25, rue Cuvier, F-75005 Paris, France This work is dedicated to the memory of our friend and colleague Jens B. Rasmussen, Curator of Reptiles at the Zoological Museum of Copenhagen, Denmark Abstract.—A large number of reptiles from the Central African Republic (CAR) were collected during recent surveys conducted over six years (October 1990 to June 1996) and deposited at the Paris Natural History Museum (MNHN). This large collection of 4873 specimens comprises 86 terrapins and tortois- es, five crocodiles, 1814 lizards, 38 amphisbaenids and 2930 snakes, totalling 183 species from 78 local- ities within the CAR. A total of 62 taxa were recorded for the first time in the CAR, the occurrence of numerous others was confirmed, and the known distribution of several taxa is greatly extended. Based on this material and an additional six species known to occur in, or immediately adjacent to, the coun- try from other sources, we present a biogeographical analysis of the 189 species of reptiles in the CAR. Key words.—Central African Republic, reptile fauna, biogeography, distribution. he majority of African countries have been improved; known distributions of many species Tthe subject of several reptile studies (see are greatly expanded and distributions of some for example LeBreton 1999 for Cameroon). species are questioned in light of our results.
    [Show full text]