Australasian Journal of Herpetology 1 ISSN 1836-5698 (Print) ISSUE 17, PUBLISHED 29 APRIL 2013 ISSN 1836-5779 (Online) AustralasianAustralasian JournalJournal ofof HerpetologyHerpetology Hoser 2013 - Australasian Journal of Herpetology 18:2-79. Available online at www.herp.net CoverCover image:image: CharlespiersonserpensCharlespiersonserpensCopyright- Kotabi Publishing punctulatuspunctulatus - All rightsfromfrom Brisbane,Brisbane, reserved Qld,Qld, Australia.Australia. Contents on page two. 2 Australasian Journal of Herpetology Published 29 April 2013. ISSN 1836-5698 (Print) ISSN 1836-5779 (Online) Australasian Journal of Herpetology Issue 17, 29 April 2013 Contents Stopping the shuffle between families: Six new Colubroid snake families named. ... Raymond T. Hoser, pp. 3-21. A reassessment of the Tropidophiidae, including the creation of two new tribes and the division of Tropidophis Bibron, 1840 into six genera, and a revisiting of the Ungaliophiinae to create two subspecies within Ungaliophis panamensis Schmidt, 1933. ... Raymond T. Hoser, pp. 22-34. In praise of subgenera, with ethics and within the rules of Zoology: taxonomic status of the snake genera Calliophis Gray, 1835, Liophidium Boulenger, 1896 and Liopholidophis Mocquard, 1904 (Serpentes). ... Raymond T. Hoser, pp. 35-50. An overdue new taxonomy for the Rhinophiidae (Uropeltidae). ... Raymond T. Hoser, pp. 51-57. New tribes and sub-tribes of Vipers and elapid snakes and two new species of snake (Squamata:Serpentes). ... Raymond T. Hoser, pp. 58-63. Australasian Journal of Herpetology Publishes original research in printed form in relation to reptiles, other fauna and related matters in a peer reviewed journal for permenant public scientific record, and has a global audience. Full details at: http://www.herp.net Online journals (this issue) appear a month after hard copy publication. Minimum print run of first printings is always at least fifty hard copies. Proudly Supported by Snakebusters: Australia’s best reptiles. Snakebusters are Australia’s only hands-on reptiles shows that let people hold the animals. Hoser 2013 - Australasian Journal of Herpetology 16:3-8. Available online at www.herp.net Copyright- Kotabi Publishing - All rights reserved 3 Australasian JournalAustralasian of Herpetology Journal 17:3-21. of Herpetology ISSN 1836-5698 (Print) Published 29 April 2013. ISSN 1836-5779 (Online) Stopping the shuffle between families: Six new Colubroid snake families named. RAYMOND T. HOSER 488 Park Road, Park Orchards, Victoria, 3134, Australia. Phone: +61 3 9812 3322 Fax: 9812 3355 E-mail: [email protected] Received 6 March 2013, Accepted 4 April 2013, Published 29 April 2013. ABSTRACT Recent molecular studies have effectively resolved the phylogeny of most of the modern snakes. Notwithstanding this, the taxonomy at the family level is seen to be inconsistent between major clades, with family level groups of similar divergence times being classified by single authors variously as genera, subfamilies and families within single given papers. To correct the inconsistencies, some of the lower ranked groups are elevated to match the others already accorded family status. This also brings the taxonomy and nomenclature of the snakes more into line with other vertebrate groups, including most notably the birds and placental mammals. For the majority of affected clades there are already available names and each simply converts from subfamily to family. However, four well-established groups until now have not been formally named. Instead they have been shunted between other family-level groups, sometimes in placements that do not match the evidence. In view of recently published phylogenies which clearly show that these taxa should be placed separately, regardless of their very ancient affinities, they are named herein according to the Zoological Code (Ride et al. 1999). A further two groups, until now classified as being within the Pseudoxenodontinae and Colubrinae, both of which are now elevated to family status are removed from these and placed within their own families due to their early divergence. One of these in turn is divided into two newly named tribes. Keywords: Taxonomy; Snakes; Colubroidea; new families; Charlespiersonserpeniidae; Micrelapiidae; Oxyrhabdiumiidae; Psammodynastiidae; Swileserpeniidae; Thermophiidae; new tribes; Charlespiersonserpenini; Chrysopelini. INTRODUCTION Unfortunately the taxonomy and nomenclature have not The currently recognized taxonomy of the extant snakes kept up with the results produced by molecular biologists, is a synthesis of countless studies over the past two due in part to the relative speed and ease with which centuries. large amounts of genetic material can be processed. Studies of morphology and habits have been A good example of this lag was seen in the paper of complimented by the magnificent new technology of gene Pyron et al. 2011, (Fig 2) where most of the major family- sequencing and the like. level groups of Colubroidea were shown as diverging from the main Colubroidea lineage at similar times and With all this information at hand, there have been with similar speciation profiles, and yet just three well- numerous taxonomies proposed and more recently ever known groups were listed as families. These were more detailed phylogenies produced using supermatrix Elapidae, Viperidae and Homalopsidae. generating computer progams. Over the past decade numerous phylogenies have been The remaining 16 groups were listed as subfamilies produced that have established the relationships of the within two other large family groups, namely lesser-known snake genera to other better known genera Lamprophiidae, and Colubridae. and computer-generated applications calibrated with However the evidence of Pyron et al. (2011) showed known events have been able to accurately establish quite clearly that on the basis of consistency, either the common ancestry time-lines and the like. Elapidae should have been subsumed within Lamprophiidae to be consistent with the Colubridae, or Hoser 2013 - Australasian Journal of Herpetology 17:3-21. Available online at www.herp.net Copyright- Kotabi Publishing - All rights reserved 4 Australasian Journal of Herpetology alternatively the rest should have been treated as full Calamariidae families alongside the Elapidae. Charlespiersonserpeniidae fam. nov. (this paper, Also notable was that Pyron et al. (2011) did not description below) recognize the well defined subgroups within the Elapidae Colubridae as subfamilies, as had been done for the mega-families Crotalidae Lamprophiidae and Colubridae. Dipsadidae Now in fairness to the authors, a detailed taxonomy was not their objective, however it is raised here as argument Elapidae for the need to have a consistent taxonomy and Grayiidae nomenclature that other herpetologists can use. Homalopsidae In summary, I see it as preferable to elevate the Homoroselapidae approximately 22 groups of snakes with family level Micrelapiidae fam. nov. (this paper, description divergences to full family level in nomenclature rather below) than the subsuming of the majority into what could well Lamprophiidae be just two or three super-families. Natricidae This preference is also noted in view of the fact that increasing numbers of taxonomists are also using the Oxyrhabdiumiidae fam. nov. (this paper, description tribe level of nomenclature to identify groups of like below) genera, thereby in effect allowing for a little used level of Pareatidae grouping between genus and family to further clarify Prosymnidae phylogenetic affinities. Psammodynastiidae fam. nov. (this paper, description In terms of what was seen in Pyron et al. (2011), I hereby below) elevate all subfamilies within their Fig 1, to full family Psammophiidae status. Pseudaspididae None of these families, as defined as subfamilies in Pseudoxenodontidae Pyron et al. (2011) are formally defined herein. Pseudoxyrhophiidae Instead I rely on the originally published subfamily diagnoses for these same groups by the original authors Sibynophiidae to in effect become the new diagnosis for each separate Swileserpeniidae fam. nov. (this paper, description family as stated herein. below) In the event that none of the 28 listed families below Thermophiidae fam. nov. (this paper, description (excluding the six newly named) have not been below) previously listed as such (in other words only as Xenodermatidae subfamilies previously), then this paper should be treated Viperidae as the first formal recognition of these groups as family With the exception of those six family groups listed above level taxon groups. as new, all other groups have at some stage been In terms of formal diagnosis within this paper, each family previously designated as family level groupings by one or is diagnosed and defined as consisting of all species more previous author. within the family name genus group that share common In terms of the two families, Charlespiersonserpeniidae ancestry with these species as far back as the family fam. nov. and Thermophiidae fam. nov. I make the level, including those genera listed within each group as following additional comments. defined as subfamilies by Pyron et al. (2011). Based on most existing taxonomy’s Previously named subfamilies within the Elapidae (as Charlespiersonserpeniidae as defined in this paper listed by Smith et al. (1997) and others), not listed or (consisting four named genera) would probably be placed identified by Pyron et al. (2011) are also recognized by as a subfamily within