Pythons in the Eocene of Europe reveal a much older divergence of the group in sympatry with boas

Zaher, Hussam; Smith, Krister T.

doi:10.1098/rsbl.2020.0735

Cited by 465 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In any case, the vertebral morphology of the type species of these medium-sized genera, seems to deviate from that of "Palaeopython" neglectus, while the lectotype Rageophis lafonti (MNHN.F QU16342; a "mummified" trunk portion with several articulated vertebrae and ribs) does not allow direct observation of its vertebrae in dorsal view, thus it cannot be deduced whether the neural spine extends onto the roof of the zygosphene. However, we notice that there is some resemblance in the vertebral morphology with the recently described pythonoid Messelopython freyi from Messel (Zaher & Smith, 2020). In particular, the two species show a similar level of vaulting of mid-trunk vertebrae and a similar shape of the interzygapophyseal constriction.…”

Section: Description Of Newly Referred Material-intracolumnar Variation (Figs 44 45)supporting

confidence: 52%

“…108)-it possesses a welldeveloped, arched surangular ala. That would be unusual for known constrictors in the Eocene of Europe. The pythonoid Messelopython has a strong prearticular ala, but not surangular (Zaher & Smith, 2020). And in known Paleogene European Booidea (Eoconstrictor, Messelophis, Rieppelophis, Rageryx) there is no expanded ala on either surangular or prearticular.…”

Section: Mentioned In Theirmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…12C). As mentioned above, the presence of a palatine foramen would allow rejection of booid affinities for Paleryx rhombifer and make pythonoid ones plausible, especially given the recognition of the stem pythonid Messelopython freyi in the Eocene of Europe (Zaher & Smith, 2020). However, as this feature also does exist in other snakes outside Constrictores (e.g., Lee & Scanlon, 2002), we refrain from formally referring Paleryx rhombifer to Pythonoidea, pending the recovery of more cranial material from the type locality.…”

Section: Description Of Cranial Materialmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Moreover, Habersetzer and Schaal (1990), using X-radiographs, reported the presence of premaxillary teeth (a typical feature of pythonoids) in a specimen (SMF-ME 710) similar to Palaeopython from the early-middle Eocene of Messel-this observation on that material was subsequently questioned by Baszio (2004). Zaher and Smith (2020) later referred that specimen to the pythonoid Messelopython freyi, which in fact has premaxillary teeth; therefore, this specimen does not pertain to Palaeopython. Georgalis and Scheyer (2019a) suggested that it is more secure to assign Palaeopython and Paleryx to "Booidea" sensu lato, which currently corresponds to Constrictores sensu Georgalis and Smith (2020), the clade comprising both boas and pythons.…”

Section: Systematic Palaeontologymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Messel has also yielded well-preserved skeletons of smaller species of Constrictores, i.e. Messelophis variatus, Rieppelophis ermannorum, and Rageryx schmidi, as well as the pythonoid Messelopython freyi (Baszio, 2004;Scanferla & Smith, 2020aScanferla et al, 2016;Schaal & Baszio, 2004;Smith & Scanferla, 2021;Zaher & Smith, 2020). It can be stated without any doubt that the two German Konservat-Lagerstätten of Messel and Geiseltal have provided the most complete material of European large constrictors.…”

Section: Spatiotemporal Distributionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Taxonomic revision of the snakes of the genera Palaeopython and Paleryx (Serpentes, Constrictores) from the Paleogene of Europe

2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Large constrictor snakes, referred to the genera Palaeopython and Paleryx, are an ecologically prominent part of the fauna of Europe during the Paleogene. Most species were named over a century ago and their taxonomy is largely based on isolated vertebrae. Furthermore, the majority of named taxa originate from imprecisely known localities within the Phosphorites du Quercy, in southern France, and thus their exact age is not known. We critically review and re-diagnose these genera based on personal examination of all existing type material, an array of new specimens, and a detailed literature review. We consider Palaeopython and Paleryx to be valid and propose vertebral characters to distinguish them. We recognize three valid species of Palaeopython, i.e. Palaeopythoncadurcensis (type species) from the Phosphorites du Quercy, Palaeopythonceciliensis from Geiseltal, and Palaeopythonhelveticus from Dielsdorf (Switzerland), and one valid species of Paleryx, i.e. Paleryxrhombifer (type species) from Hordle Cliff (England). Four other species, which were previously treated as members of Palaeopython and Paleryx, i.e. “Palaeopython” filholii and “Palaeopython” neglectus from the Phosphorites du Quercy, “Palaeopython” fischeri from Messel, and “Paleryx” spinifer from Geiseltal, are also considered as valid but pertain to other genera. Among these four taxa, “Palaeopython” fischeri has been recently assigned to its own genus, Eoconstrictor. A new genus, Phosphoroboa gen. nov. is established to accommodate “Palaeopython” filholii. We designate a lectotype for Palaeopythoncadurcensis and establish that the paralectotype maxilla and dentary are reasonably referred to this species. New material attributed to Palaeopythoncadurcensis is described from the old collections of the Phosphorites du Quercy. Paleryxcayluxi, another species established from the old collections of the Phosphorites du Quercy, is synonymized here with Palaeopythoncadurcensis. We further clarify important errors in the original description and figures of Paleryxcayluxi, identify the exact specimens that comprise the type series, and designate a lectotype. Much new material is described for Palaeopythonceciliensis from its type area in Geiseltal and intracolumnar variation is considered. We describe additional vertebral and cranial material of Paleryxrhombifer from its type area in Hordle Cliff. Based on this cranial material, we suggest non-booid affinities for Paleryxrhombifer. We designate a lectotype for Paleryxdepressus and agree with its previous suggested synonymy with Paleryxrhombifer. We re-describe the lectotype and paralectotypes of “Palaeopython” neglectus and refer and describe new material of this species from the Phosphorites du Quercy, paying special attention to intracolumnar variation; we also defer a decision on its generic relations until more abundant and complete material can be studied. We describe new vertebral material of the booid Eoconstrictor cf. fischeri from Geiseltal; similar material was previously known only from Messel and Dielsdorf. We determine that Eoconstrictorfischeri contains two distinct and unrelated species and describe intracolumnar variation in the nominotype. We clarify certain issues regarding the type series of Paleryxspinifer, designate a lectotype, and report previously unrecognized cranial material associated with the latter specimen; we transfer this species to Eoconstrictor based on cranial features and recombine it as Eoconstrictorspinifer comb. nov. We finally describe much new vertebral and cranial material of Phosphoroboafilholii comb. nov. from the Phosphorites du Quercy (both from the old collections but also from the late Eocene localities of Escamps A and C), paying special attention to intracolumnar variation. Based on this cranial material from Escamps, we identify Phosphoroboa gen. nov. as a booid. An analytical approach is undertaken in many isolated remains in order to quantify vertebral structures and assess intracolumnar variation, as well as associating isolated cranial elements to vertebral-based taxa. 3D models of the type material of the Geiseltal and Messel taxa are presented. The importance of vertebrae in the taxonomy of fossil Constrictores is addressed, although it is acknowledged that it is cranial material that can afford the most reliable phylogenetic conclusions. The diversity, distribution, biogeographic origins, and final demise and extinction of large Constrictores in the Paleogene of Europe are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Description Of Newly Referred Material-intracolumnar Variation (Figs 44 45)supporting

confidence: 52%

Section: Mentioned In Theirmentioning

confidence: 99%