Acanthophis is one of the more complex and poorly understood genera of Elapids. Considerable morphological diversity (for example, see illustrations in O'Shea, 1996) was until now covered under very few names, and there have been no comprehensive revisions of the genus.
In an unrefereed regional herpetological publication, Hoser (1998) reviewed this complex genus, and described five new species and one subspecies.
This taxonomic arrangement has not yet been critically evaluated, and the data presented in Hoser’s paper do not allow an independent assessment of the situation. It appears that several of the names used by Hoser may be unavailable under the provisions of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature, and should not be used (Aplin, 1999; Aplin & Donnellan, 1999). This genus deserves a much more substantial and authoritative review, and there is a real danger that Hoser’s review will create further confusion rather than help to rationalise the taxonomy of this medically important group. Fortunately, one of the species described by Hoser, A. wellsi has since been redescribed and redefined in a peer-reviewed scientific journal (Aplin & Donnellan, 1999).
The publication of major revisions of species complexes of venomous snakes in regional journals is controversial due to potential problems of quality control (McCranie and Wilson, 1979; Aplin, 1999) and availability to other researchers (Wüster and McCarthy, 1996; Wüster, 1998). In the words of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature, article 7, recommendation 7A: “Wide dissemination - Authors have a responsibility to ensure that new scientific names, nomenclatural acts, and information likely to affect nomenclature are made widely known. This responsibility is most easily discharged by publication in appropriate scientific journals or well-known monographic series.” It is unfortunate that this recommendation is often ignored in herpetological systematics. It should also be noted that, at the time when Hoser’s publication was written, the description of one of his species by another author was already in press (Aplin, 1999; Aplin & Donnellan, 1999); careful adherence to the Code of Ethics (Appendix A) of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature would have prevented this unfortunate situation.
In situations such as this, where our understanding of the systematics of a group is incomplete but evolving rapidly, the question of nomenclature is always going to be problematical, and it is impossible to make recommendations for toxinologists or herpetoculturists. The main consideration, as always, is that any snake or experimental venom should be identifiable, irrespective of future developments. This is best achieved by obtaining and providing as much information as possible about the origin of animals or venoms, and a frank and open discussion of the problems of the identification and nomenclature of specimens at hand. Anyone working with Acanthophis and their venoms would be well advised to ensure that they have precise information on the locality of origin of the snakes. Any animals discussed in publications should be preserved in a natural history collection, so that their identity can be verified and related to further developments in the systematics of this complex genus. Given the uncertain status of many populations of this genus, this kind of information is likely to be taxonomically more informative and more durable than potentially unstable or short-lived scientific names.
For further comments, see Wüster et al. (2001).

• Aplin, K.P. (1999) "Amateur" taxonomy in Australian herpetology – help or hindrance? Monitor 10 (2/3): 104-109.
• Aplin, K.P. & S.C. Donnellan (1999) An extended description of the Pilbara Death Adder, Acanthophis wellsi Hoser (Serpentes: Elapidae), with notes on the Desert Death Adder, A. pyrrhus Boulenger, and identification of a possible hybrid zone. Records of the Western Australian Museum 19: 277-298.
• Hoser, R. (1998a) Death adders (genus Acanthophis): an overview, including descriptions of five new species and one subspecies. Monitor 9(2): 20-30, 33-41.
• McCranie, J.R. & L.D. Wilson (1979) Commentary on taxonomic practice in regional herpetological publications: a review of A preliminary account of the rattlesnakes with the description of four new subspecies, by Herbert S. Harris, Jr. and Robert S. Simmons (1978. Bull Maryland Herpetol. Soc., 14(3): 105-211), with comments on other Harris and Simmons rattlesnake papers. Herpetological Review 10(1): 18-21.
• O'Shea, M. (1996) A Guide to the Snakes of Papua New Guinea. Independent Publishing, Port Moresby.
• Wüster, W. (1998) Laien, Profis und Systematik: Bemerkungen zu GUMPRECHT (1997, Sauria 19: 9-30). Sauria 20: 25-27.
• Wüster, W. & C.J. McCarthy (1996) Venomous snake systematics: implications for snakebite treatment and toxinology. Pp. 13-23. In C. Bon & M. Goyffon (Eds.), Envenomings and their Treatments. Fondation Mérieux, Lyon.
• Wüster, W., B. Bush, J.S. Keogh, M. O'Shea & R. Shine (2001) Taxonomic contributions in the "amateur" literature: comments on recent descriptions of new genera and species by Raymond Hoser. Litteratura Serpentium 21: 67-79, 86-91. (Acrobat version of submitted manuscript available here)

 

Shea (1998) studied the patterns of geographic variation displayed by black whip snakes in northern Australia and Papua New Guinea. These snakes have variously been referred to as Demansia papuensis and D. atra  in the literature. The status of some populations, particularly those of New Guinea, was unclear until recently (e.g., O'Shea, 1996). The existence of two species is confirmed: Demansia papuensis, found in northern Australia from the Kimberleys to central eastern Queensland, and D. vestigiata, found from extreme northeastern Western Australia to extreme southeastern Queensland, and also in southern Papua New Guinea. Despite its name, D. papuensis is not found on New Guinea. In many previous papers discussing these snakes, the two species were confused, misidentified, or composite samples were used. The name Demansia atra, widely used in the literature until now, is a junior synonym of D. vestigiata.

• O'Shea, M. (1996) A Guide to the Snakes of Papua New Guinea. Independent Publishing, Port Moresby.
• Shea, G.M. (1998) Geographic variation in scalation and size of the black whip snakes (Squamata: Elapidae: Demansia vestigiata complex): evidence for two broadly sympatric species. Beagle, Records of the Museums and Art Galleries of the Northern Territory, 14: 41-61.

Broadley (1998) reviewed the taxonomy of the Elapsoidea semiannulata complex. The taxon boulengeri, hitherto regarded as a subspecies of E. semiannulata, is found to occur in narrow parapatry with E.s. semiannulata, without signs of introgression, and is therefore considered to be a full species, Elapsoidea boulengeri.

• Broadley, D.G. (1998) A review of the African Elapsoidea semiannulata complex (Serpentes: Elapidae). African Journal of Herpetology 47: 13-23.

Hoser (1998) described a new genus of Australasian Elapid snakes, Pailsus, with the single species P. pailsei.  The characteristics purporting to distinguish the genus “Pailsus” from Pseudechis are either insufficiently well defined, or do not support the distinction. Consequently, the genus Pailsus is most likely best regarded as a synonym of Pseudechis. The species pailsei is not adequately distinguished from Pseudechis australis in Hoser's paper. In particular, a much more comprehensive survey of variation in P. australis would have been required to determine whether the characters purported to distinguish the two species actually do so. Further, more detailed research is required to determine convincingly whether Hoser's snake is really a valid species similar to but distinct from P. australis, or simply a variety of P. australis. Sensationalist media releases notwithstanding, there is no evidence that anyone has ever been bitten by this form. See also Williams & Starkey (1999).
Another problem is that the snake described by Hoser differs from Pseudechis australis in the same manner as does Cannia weigeli, a species described by Wells & Wellington (1987) but subsequently ignored by the scientific community. Hoser does not mention Cannia weigeli, and does not attempt to differentiate his P. pailsei from it. Cannia weigeli and Pailsus pailsei may thus be two names for the same species, in which case weigeli would have priority. As things stand, it is thus difficult to determine whether there is one, two or no neglected species resembling Pseudechis australis to be found in northern Australia. For further comments, see Wüster et al. (2001).

• Hoser, R., 1998.  A new snake from Queensland, Australia (Serpentes: Elapidae). Monitor 10: 5-9.
• Wells, R.W. & C.R. Wellington (1987) A new species of proteroglyphous snake (Serpentes: Oxyuranidae) from Australia. Australian Herpetologist 503: 1-8.
• Williams, D.J. & B.A. Starkey (1999) Comments on the genus Pailsus (Hoser, 1998). WWW Document: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ozherp/files/Venomous%20Snakes/
• Wüster, W., B. Bush, J.S. Keogh, M. O'Shea & R. Shine (2001) Taxonomic contributions in the "amateur" literature: comments on recent descriptions of new genera and species by Raymond Hoser. Litteratura Serpentium 21: 67-79, 86-91. (Acrobat version of submitted manuscript available here).

 

Horner (1998) described a new species ofSimoselaps, S. morrisi, from the northern Arnhem Land, Northern Territory, Australia. These small, secretive snakes are normally regarded as inoffensive to humans, but their venoms remain largely unstudied.

• Horner, P. (1998) Simoselaps morrisi sp. nov. (Elapidae), a new species of snake from the Northern Territory. Beagle, Records of the Museums and Art Galleries of the Northern Territory 14: 63-70.

Back