Reptile & Amphibian Forums

"Herps" are reptiles and amphibians right? Who decided on this group herps and why? What exactly is it supposed to mean? I ask because while reptiles are amniotes(lay eggs with semipermeable protective membranes to keep in moisture, ect), amphibians are not. Reptiles are more closely related to birds and mammals (both of which really are reptiles) than amphibians.

So why herps? Is this some old-school classification from before relationships were figured out as they are now?

-----
~Melissa
1.0 Ambanja Panther (Diesel)
0.1 African Hegdehog (Kaimah)

>>"Herps" are reptiles and amphibians right? Who decided on this group herps and why? What exactly is it supposed to mean? I ask because while reptiles are amniotes(lay eggs with semipermeable protective membranes to keep in moisture, ect), amphibians are not. Reptiles are more closely related to birds and mammals (both of which really are reptiles) than amphibians.
>>
>>So why herps? Is this some old-school classification from before relationships were figured out as they are now?
>>
>>
>>
>>-----
>>~Melissa
>>1.0 Ambanja Panther (Diesel)
>>0.1 African Hegdehog (Kaimah)

Actually, mammals aren't really reptiles at all. Birds are phylogenetically in Reptilia as members of the Archosauria clade but Mammalia is basal to the Reptilia divergence within Amniota (Reptilia and Mammalia are both Amniota but they are seperate branches within it with Mammalia and Reptilia being distinct of eachother beyond that point). As far as herps, I don't have the answer to that question but my feeling is it has to do with older classification methods and simply grouping of the study of two rather primative Chordates that tend to often be studied in conjunction.

Chris
-----
Chris Anderson
parsonii_hoehnelii@hotmail.com
Editor - Chameleons! Online E-zine: http://www.chameleonnews.com/
Admin - Captive Chameleon Bloodline Tracking Database (CCBTD): http://www.chameleondatabase.com/
Author - Chameleon Care and Information Center (CCIC) - http://www.geocities.com/ccicenter/(Currently Down)

From the Greek: herpeton - crawling thing (i.e. reptile).
-----
Currently
2.0 F. silvestris (NFO)
1.1 F. pardalis (Ambilobe)
0.0.3 D. tinctorius (Suriname Cobalt)
0.0.3 D. tinctorius (Weygoldt)
0.0.~100 E. prosticus

Not to pick nits, I checked my Latin/English scientific naming dictionary:

"herp" is derived from the Greek herpo (to creep), herpes (a creeper); herpeton (a reptile); herpestes (a creeping thing). It works for me...who wants to repeat "reptiles and amphibians" in every sentence? Either that or come up with some equally annoying acronym.

Then you could breed them but they wouldn't be allowed to get married.
Sorry I couldn't help myself

Oh my, that's too funny.
-----
~Melissa
1.0 Ambanja Panther (Diesel)
0.1 African Hegdehog (Kaimah)

so glad you are back on the forum!!!!!
-----
0.1 veiled - Luna
0.2 felines - Kyndra and Líta
1.0 African Clawed Frog - Skipper
0.5 Mad. Hissers (for summer - all girls, no little ones, whew!)

Hmm.. I'd have to disagree. Mammals are ancestors of synapsid reptiles like Pelycosaurs. (The ones with the big sails on their backs.) All synapid reptiles are now extinct, the only synapsids that remain are mammals.

I guess what I should have said is that mammals and birds are the descendants of reptiles.
-----
~Melissa
1.0 Ambanja Panther (Diesel)
0.1 African Hegdehog (Kaimah)

My palaeo prof is completely off his rocker!!
-----
~Melissa
1.0 Ambanja Panther (Diesel)
0.1 African Hegdehog (Kaimah)

>>Hmm.. I'd have to disagree. Mammals are ancestors of synapsid reptiles like Pelycosaurs. (The ones with the big sails on their backs.) All synapid reptiles are now extinct, the only synapsids that remain are mammals.
>>
>>I guess what I should have said is that mammals and birds are the descendants of reptiles.
>>-----
>>~Melissa
>>1.0 Ambanja Panther (Diesel)
>>0.1 African Hegdehog (Kaimah)

Melissa,

Phylogenetically, the synapomorphies of Amniota are the amniotic egg and the axis (modified second cervical vertebra). At this point, Amniota splits into Reptilia and Mammalia. Mammalia is defined by the presense of hair, mammary glands, incus and maleius, heterodont dentition, the 4 chambered heard, muscular, thoracic diaphrahm and a single bone in the lower jaw (the dentary). Reptilia is defined by the production of uric acid as an excretory product, temperature-dependent sex determination and beta keratin. Reptilia splits into Chelonia and Sauria. Sauria splits into Lepidosaura (Squamata and Sphenodon) and Archosauria (Crocodylia and Aves). Thats according to Pough et al. and Gergus and Schuett.

Chris
-----
Chris Anderson
parsonii_hoehnelii@hotmail.com
Editor - Chameleons! Online E-zine: http://www.chameleonnews.com/
Admin - Captive Chameleon Bloodline Tracking Database (CCBTD): http://www.chameleondatabase.com/
Author - Chameleon Care and Information Center (CCIC) - http://www.geocities.com/ccicenter/(Currently Down)

Chris,

Hmmm..I hadn't heard of Reptilia used as a strict phylogenetic term. Just a more informal grouping. The classification you listed is slightly different than from what I have learned, which is:

Amniotes are divided into the Synapsids and Sauropsids, which include Chelonids. Then of course are also Lepidosaurs and Archosaurs. The term reptile was not used in any formal classification, though we talk about mammalian ancestors (Therapsids) as "mammal-like reptiles".

Guess our disagreement comes from the definition of "reptile". There are so many different opinions in science, how confusing it gets.

Know anything about bats? I'm writing a paper on their phylogenetic relatioships, yipee.

Think we'll get booted from the Cham forum?

-----
~Melissa
1.0 Ambanja Panther (Diesel)
0.1 African Hegdehog (Kaimah)

>>Chris,
>>
>>Hmmm..I hadn't heard of Reptilia used as a strict phylogenetic term. Just a more informal grouping. The classification you listed is slightly different than from what I have learned, which is:
>>
>>Amniotes are divided into the Synapsids and Sauropsids, which include Chelonids. Then of course are also Lepidosaurs and Archosaurs. The term reptile was not used in any formal classification, though we talk about mammalian ancestors (Therapsids) as "mammal-like reptiles".
>>
>>Guess our disagreement comes from the definition of "reptile". There are so many different opinions in science, how confusing it gets.
>>
>>Know anything about bats? I'm writing a paper on their phylogenetic relatioships, yipee.
>>
>>Think we'll get booted from the Cham forum?
>>
>>-----
>>~Melissa
>>1.0 Ambanja Panther (Diesel)
>>0.1 African Hegdehog (Kaimah)

Melissa,

You are correct, Sauropsida and Synapsida are the Phylogenetic Systematics names for the groups while Reptilia and Mammalia are, respectively, the more general names of these outgroups (my text includes both names in their trees). I think the confusion is with the "mammal-like reptiles." I don't think this description is meant to link either group by relation any further then their Amniota heritage. However, many people to not realize that, like you said, Aves are part of the Reptilia clade.

Chris
-----
Chris Anderson
parsonii_hoehnelii@hotmail.com
Editor - Chameleons! Online E-zine: http://www.chameleonnews.com/
Admin - Captive Chameleon Bloodline Tracking Database (CCBTD): http://www.chameleondatabase.com/
Author - Chameleon Care and Information Center (CCIC) - http://www.geocities.com/ccicenter/(Currently Down)

Would there be any connection to the fact that both reptiles & amphibians are exothermic, tho aren't fish exotherms as well? Hmm, my SO & I are now debating this topic... anyone know? (forgive the non-bio-geek for potentially misusing any & all terminology)