2004
DOI: 10.1016/j.ympev.2004.01.001
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

New insights into the early history of snakes inferred from two nuclear genes

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

3
45
0
4

Year Published

2005
2005
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 38 publications
(52 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
3
45
0
4
Order By: Relevance
“…2;Tchernov et al, 2000;Apesteguia and Zaher, 2006). These phylogenetic hypotheses stand in stark contrast to the recent findings based on molecular data, which place bolyeriids as sister-taxon to a clade that includes the uropeltines (traditionally considered non-macrostomatan), Acrochordus and colubroids, whereas the tropidophiids were found to be the sister-taxon of the non-macrostomatan genus Anilius (Vidal and Hedges, 2004; see also Vidal and David, 2004).…”
mentioning
confidence: 72%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…2;Tchernov et al, 2000;Apesteguia and Zaher, 2006). These phylogenetic hypotheses stand in stark contrast to the recent findings based on molecular data, which place bolyeriids as sister-taxon to a clade that includes the uropeltines (traditionally considered non-macrostomatan), Acrochordus and colubroids, whereas the tropidophiids were found to be the sister-taxon of the non-macrostomatan genus Anilius (Vidal and Hedges, 2004; see also Vidal and David, 2004).…”
mentioning
confidence: 72%
“…There is no morphological evidence known that supports the heterodox placement of tropidophiids at the base of alethinophidian snakes, as is obtained using molecular data (Vidal and Hedges, 2004; see also Vidal and David, 2004). The position of Casarea dussumieri (and implicitly of bolyeriids: Anthony and Guibé, 1952) relative to tropidophiids on the one hand, and to the Acrochordus-colubroid clade on the other, remains equivocal as far as cranial characters are concerned.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While the phylogenetic position of Achalinus or the subfamily Xenodermatinae has long been disputed. They were once positioned to the family Colubridae, but in recent years, the subfamily Xenodermatinae was considered to be the primitive group of the Caenophidia, and its divergence was later than that of Acrochordus granulatus [12,63,64] . The subfamily Xenodermatinae has been arranged in the "Acrochordoidea" [9] or "Xenodermatoidea" [64] or Elapidae [65] , or merely in the Tribe Nothopsini without familial designation [13] rather than "Colubridae".…”
Section: Phylogenetic Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…(Heise et al, 1995;Vidal and David, 2004). Python regius belongs to Alethinophidia, which diverged from scolecophidians approximately 150MYA, and is typically divided into caenophidians (advanced snakes, ~2470 sp.…”
Section: Evolution and Phylogenetic Analysis Of P Regiusmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…), also known as venomous snakes, and henophidia, which includes several other groups that utilize constriction. Pythonidae belongs to the constrictive group, of which Python is one of the 8 genera, and regius is one of the 33 species (Vidal and David, 2004). The evolutionary history of snakes is controversial.…”
Section: Evolution and Phylogenetic Analysis Of P Regiusmentioning
confidence: 99%