Herman, I agree, the species P. deppei and P. lineaticollis, should be included in this study, along with Pantherophis spp, and other genera, including Bogertophis, and other Lampropeltines. I think it would be very inconvenient to dump any species outside of Pituophis into that genus, because of their long history, but I do think Pituophis spp. should be considered ratsnakes, in the sense they are closely related to ratsnakes (previously, Elaphe). P. deppei and P. lineaticollis seem especially close to ratsnakes, in appearance anyway, and they should definitely be included in any studies, imho. I would assume future genetic studies would attempt to show how closely all the genera in the Lampropeltini are related, as well as species within genera. I would hope for this at least.



Thanks for the discussion.



- Terry





>>Terry,

>>

>>Thanx for your reply. I agree with you on most points, however as we still don't know where the plesiomorphic members of the genus Pituophis (P. deppei, P. lineaticollis) fit in Burbrink et al's dendrogram, it is impossible to say at this time which species should be and which shouldn't be included in this genus. Therefore we cannot rule out the possibility that Bogertophis spp. should one day be renamed as Pituophis spp. On the other hand, the very same dendrogram clearly shows that this is not a very likely scenario.

>>

>>Hasta la vista,

>>

>>Herman.




-----
Ratsnake Haven...researching ratsnakes since 1988



Ratsnake Haven Group...an information providing list site.



Ratsnake Foundation...ratsnake forums.

[ Show Entire Thread ]