NEW SQUAMATA CLASSIFICATION

[Mario Schweiger]

..here it is:
PODNAR, M., B. BRUVO MADARIC & W.MAYER (2013): Non-concordant phylogeographical patterns of three widely codistributed endemic Western Balkans lacertid lizards (Reptilia, Lacertidae) shaped by specific habitat requirements and different responses to Pleistocene climatic oscillations.- J. Zoolog. Syst. Evol. Res. 52(2): 119 - 129
tree at page:

not sure, if he only one

[Jeroen Speybroeck]

Well... both stem from the same year, but it's of course silly to debate.

In any case, I find it hard to believe. Not impossible, of course.

[Gabriel Martínez]

Thanks for your comments! the taxonomic puzzle continues

Sometimes studying the morphology is difficult to believe in DNA. But soon or late we will have to accept "the truth"

Thanks!

[Peter Oefinger]

Maybe I didn't get the point: the Podnar paper just says that Algyroides and Dinarolacerta are closely related. This isn't really new nor really surprising:

Or did they intend to remove the genus Dinarolacerta?

[Thomas Bader]

If I remember right, Werner told me that the two Western Algyroides are further away from the Eastern two A. species than Dinarolacerta, but I am not really sure about that

[Mario Schweiger]

If I remember right, Werner told me that the two Western Algyroides are further away from the Eastern two A. species than Dinarolacerta, but I am not really sure about that

+1 you're right, Thomas!

[Peter Oefinger]

Cool: goodbye, Dinarolacerta!
Someone should publish a paper

[Karim Chouchane]

Concerning the whole Squamata phylogeny : the Pyron et al. cladogram is not the first to reveal such evolutionary relationships, in fact the examples that you give (Cordylidae - Scincidae; Agamidae-Chamaeleonidae) are very old groupings (or slightly more recent for Amphisbaenia-Lacertidae). So even if the results of convergent evolution can sometimes be striking (e.g. Platysaurus), none of these relationships are really shocking.

If these can sometime appear a little odd to some of us may be due to the fact that the most recent phylogenies are rarely used in general works either by conservatism or by convenience ( which book dealing with reptiles include birds as well??). Especially paleontologists tend to stick to the old classification (with Iguania being the most basal clade) even in higher level publications.

Concerning the Algyroides-Dinarolacerta relationship: even if this paraphyly of Algyroides has been suggested by multiples analysis (Pavlicev & Mayer), none was sufficiently significant to act the inclusion of Dinarolacerta in Algyroides (or the Algyroides split)!

Pavlicev M, Mayer W. Fast radiation of the subfamily Lacertinae (Reptilia: Lacertidae): history or methodical artefact? Mol Phylogenet Evol. 2009 Sep;52(3):727-34. doi: 10.1016/j.ympev.2009.04.020. Epub 2009 May 8.

Platysaurus:

[Mario Schweiger]

From:
Pavlicev M, Mayer W. Fast radiation of the subfamily Lacertinae (Reptilia: Lacertidae): history or methodical artefact? Mol Phylogenet Evol. 2009 Sep;52(3):727-734

The only potentially paraphyletic genus is Algyroides,as Dinarolacerta (D. mosorensis and D. montenegrina) consistently clusters with Algyroides in all trees. In spite of this association being present repeatedly, the difference in fit between the tree constrained with monophyly and the unconstrained tree is not statistically significant (B10  1), thus the support for the paraphyly of Algyroides is not sufficient given the present data. Nevertheless, in the light of morphological differences between Algyroides and Dinarolacerta even an indication of the very close relationship is surprising and should be examined closer. The morphological characters considered synapomorphies of Algyroides (e.g., large dorsal scales with micro ornamentation; Arnold et al., 2007) are practically absent in Dinarolacerta.If Dinarolacerta were a subclade within Algyroides, these characteristics would therefore have been lost secondarily, for example as an adaptation to narrow crevices, i.e., a special niche within the rock habitats. A perhaps useful hint for the morphological study, could be that Dinarolacerta always appears in the same position and splits Algyroides into two groups reflecting the distributions in the western (A. fitzingeri + A. marchi), respectively, more eastern part of the Mediterranean region (A. moreoticus + A. nigropunctatus). These relationships within the genus Algyroides have been found before based on morphology and molecular data (Harris et al., 1999b).

full pdf (article in press) in db: PDF-1700

[Gabriel Martínez]

Fantastic comments. Rhinechis and Zamenis were in the past together in Elaphe. It not so rare to imagine all of them together again! Much more rare for me it´s to see tesselata so close to Natrix natrix, for me tesselata is quite similar in morphology and behavior to Natrix maura and Natrix natrix (at least astreptophora), a very different to both

Yes Karim. It would be rare a book with the groups: 1. skinks and Platysaurus, 2. amphibaenians and true lizards, 3. chamaeleons and agamids, 4. Gekkos, 5. monitors and glass lizards, 6. snakes and 7. crocodyles, turtles and birds!!!

Amazing Ptalysaurus, I have also photos of a male, but I prefered to use the female to avoid the envy of Peter

Platysaurus.jpg (157.98 KiB) Viewed 5209 times