>>New World Elaphe originated in the Old World. So, it is a descendant of a species of Old World Elaphe. Subsequently Lampropeltis, Pituophis, Arizona, Stilosoma, Cemophora et al. evolved from this immigrant. Classifying New World Elaphe in a different genus would render Old World Elaphe paraphyletic. That is certainly a good excuse to send Old World Elaphe to the chopping block. But since New World Elaphe is itself paraphyletic, it means New World Elaphe itself may have to be splintered into two or more genera. That gives the taxonomists and those who keep track of taxonomic changes a hobby, but it really does not do the scientific community at large any good.



I don't have the paper in front of me, but I don't think there is much evidence that Pantherophis (=New World Elaphe) is paraphyletic, once you remove Bogertophis and Senticolis. so I don't foresee any immediate need for further splitting within the New World group.



As to Old World Elaphe - the probolem there extends far beyond the New world Elaphe. The Old World Elaphe are absolutely all over the place in the colubrine tree - some, like radiata, are closer to racers and Ptyas than to the bulk of what was called Elaphe.



Whether one likes it or not, the predominant view among taxonomists is that classification and nomenclature should reflect phylogeny. This requires some reclassification as new evidence comes to light. While I agree that some of the rehashing of some taxa has been excessive, and not always based on particularly solid evidence, individual excesses do not invalidate the general principle. In the case of Elaphe, a thorough revision was long overdue. Whetehr all the splits proposed will turn out to be necessary or widely accepted is an open question, but I have no doubt that many of the new arrangements will become widely accepted.



Cheers,



Wolfgang
-----
WW



WW Home

[ Show Entire Thread ]