Thesis: Montivipera - Macrovipera - Daboia

[Mario Schweiger]

The thesis from Nikolaus Stümpel on:
Phylogenie und Phylogeographie eurasischer Viperinae unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der orientalischen Vipern der Gattungen Montivipera und Macrovipera
is out.
PDF-4183.pdf
Unfortunately complete in German language, even the very extended summary.

In a few words, what should be changed:
Macrovipera:
Macrovipera schweizeri is a ssp. of lebetina.
All former ssp. of lebetina are valid, even M. l. euphratica.
Montivipera:
M. wagneri, xanthina, bornmuelleri and bulgardaghica are valid. albizona is a synonym of bulgardaghica.
M. raddei, latifii are valid.
Daboia:
Daboia mauritanica and deserti belong to "Daboia" but the genetic differences to ruselii are higher than between Montivipera and Macrovipera. Should be a own (Sub)Genus.

Mario

[Daniel Kane]

Sounds like it would be a very interesting read; thanks for the brief summary Mario. In a way I'm surprised that schweizeri should be a ssp. of lebetina. Not so surprised that the 'Daboia' vipers of north Africa and ruselli should be in different genus though. Is there any mention of the relationship of Daboia palaestinae to the others?

[Mario Schweiger]

It looks like, the data on Daboia (mauritanica, desertii, palaestinae, russelii and siamenis) are just a "side-effect" from the main investigation Montivipera - Macrovipera
Macrovipera l. schweizeri:
"Die maximale genetische Distanz innerhalb M. lebetina beträgt p = 0,049. Die mediterranen Inselpopulationen (Kykladen, Zypern) der Levanteotter gehen auf eine gemeinsame Stammlinie zurück. Levanteottern von der türkischen Festlandsküste bei Mersin besitzen den gleichen Haplotyp wie die Populationen des 850 km entfernt liegenden Kykladenarchipels. Trotz der isolierten Inselverbreitung und der großen räumlichen Entfernung zwischen den Populationen beträgt ihre genetische Distanz nur 0,66%."
Maximal genetic distance within Macrovipera lebetina is p=0.049. Mediterranean island populations (Cyclades, Cyprus) have the same anchestor. Specimens from the Turkish mainland (Mersin) have the same haplotype as the vipers from the 850 km away Cyclades. The genetic distance is 0,66% only.

Here the tree of Macrovipera

the trees of Montivipera (west and east group)

and the small tree of Daboia without palaestinae

Mario

[Jeroen Speybroeck]

Thanks! I will chew on this. No peer reviewed papers originated from this research?

[Thomas Bader]

Hi Mario!

Thank's for that. Sounds reasonably. The only question which I still have (without having read the paper). What about the weird M. lebetina transmediterranea? Also valid? So are there really three different big vipers in northern Tunisia?

Th

[Jeroen Speybroeck]

Thanks! I will chew on this. No peer reviewed papers originated from this research?

Jeroen, shouldn't I be the one bringing this kind of sublime taunt?

Sorry!!!

No, seriously, it's just more or less unthinkable in Belgium nowadays to become a PhD biologist without having several papers published. But, I saw now that apparently, one has been published in Zookeys. I guess some will still appear?

What is the reasoning to turn Milos viper back to subspecies status?

[Mario Schweiger]

@ Thomas
No data on transmediterranea available, due to lack of genetic data (only old conserved specimens).
But, as I told many times: looks like transmediterranea are just aberrant mauritanica/deseti

@ Jeroen
Milos vipers, specimens from Cyprus and Mersin (turkish mainland) share the same haplotype (see tree a few postings before).

@Michael
The undescribed basal Macrovipera from S Iran was already mentioned in Stümpel & Joger (ZooKeys, PDF-1817 in DB), but still seems to be undescribed .

Mario

[Mario Schweiger]

Would be to many boehmei during the last years

Mario

[Thomas Bader]

Yes Mario - I agree with you. The distribution of transmediterranea does not really fit into Macrovipera.

[Wolfgang Wüster]

@ Thomas
No data on transmediterranea available, due to lack of genetic data (only old conserved specimens).
But, as I told many times: looks like transmediterranea are just aberrant mauritanica/deseti

I would still disagree with that - I did a little bit of non-taxonomic morphological work on the group (museum specimens) some years back, and by chance came across a specimen of transmediterranea that had been mislabelled as mauritanica - it stood out immediately. Those are completely different animals! Like you I was a skeptic about transmediterranea, but that "encounter" convinced me that it is real!