THE PEARCE­SELLARDS Series NUMBER 27 A NEW SYSTEMATIC ARRANGEMENT FOR PHILODRYAS SERRA (SCHLEGEL) AND PHILODRYAS PSEUDOSERRA AMARAL (SERPENTES: COLUBRIDAE) Robert A. Thomas and James R. Dixon July, 1977 Texas Memorial Museum/2400 Trinity/Austin, Texas 78705 W. W. Newcomb, Director The Pearce-Sellards Series is an occasional, miscellaneous series of brief reports of museum and museum associated field investigationsand other research. Its title seeks to commemorate the first two directors of the Texas Memorial Museum, both now deceased; J. E. Pearce and Dr. E. H. Sellards, professors of anthropology and geology respectively, of The University of Texas. A complete list of Pearce-Sellards papers, as well as other publica­tions of the museum, will be sent upon request. A NEW SYSTEMATIC ARRANGEMENT FOR PHILODRYAS SERRA (SCHLEGEL) AND PHILODRYAS PSEUDOSERRA AMARAL (SERPENTES: COLUBRIDAE) by Robert A. Thomas* and James R. Dixon** INTRODUCTION Following publication of the “Catalogue of the Neotropical Squamata”by Peters and Orejas-Miranda (1970) and Peters and Donoso-Barros (1970),there has been a resurgence of interest in South American reptiles. Many persons hampered with poor libraries were able to tentatively identify old and poorly known material long stored on collection shelves. Such activities resulted in the discovery of numerous chaotic systematic arrangements and, in turn, initiated revisions of various taxonomic units. This chain of events has produced a better understanding of systematic relationships among manydifficult groups ofreptiles, especially the snakes. Recent revisionary studies of the colubrid snake genus Philodryas Wagler(Thomas 1976a) have shown that two species traditionally included in the genus, P. serra (Sclilegel) and P. pseudoserra Amaral, constitute a distinct genus, sharing numerous features which indicate their congeneric nature. They are virtually identical in habitus, pattern, osteology, and overall squa­mation (including microornamentation), being exclusively diagnosed from one another only on the basis of number of ventral scales, dorsal scale cari­nation, and hemipenial features. The purpose of this study was to examine the relationships of Philodryas serra and P. pseudoserra with respect to the otherspecies ofthe genus. NomenclaturalHistoryoftheSpecies. Onlytwo synonymsofPhilodryas serra were recognized by Boulenger (1896: 134) and Peters and Orejas-Miranda (1970: 245): Galeophis jani Berthold and Teleolepis striaticepsCope. Galeophis jani was questionably placed in the synonymy ofP. serra by Boulenger (1896: 134). The subcaudal number of 163 given by Berthold (1859: 18!) is the only factor that renders their conspecificity doubtful. We have examined the holotype of G. jani (ZMUG 518a) and found it to have 103 subcaudals. The number cited by Berthold seems to have been a lapsus calami. Galeophis jani can now be placed with certainty in the sy­nonymy of P. serra. Examination of the holotype of Teleolepis striaticeps (MCZ 2909) reveals that it is not conspecific with Philodryas serra, but with P. pseudoserra. It is a female with 201 ventrals (191-209 in pseudoserra females vs. 218-237 in serra females) and smooth scales (vs. keeled in serra). The species-group .Department of Biology, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas 77843. ..Department of Wildlife & Fisheries Sciences, TexasA&M University, College Station, Texas 77843. name sthaticeps antedates pseudoserra by 67 years. Since the species-group name pseudoserra has been used fewer than 10 times, the Law of Priority may be invoked in resurrecting the older name as Philodryas striaticeps and placing P. pseudoserra in its synonymy. Another name that should be mentioned is Philodryas serra var. laevis Jan (1863:84). Our efforts to locate the type for comparison have failed and it has not been mentioned again in the literature. Although its varietal name suggests smooth scales, it was not diagnosed from P. serra by Jan, thus, P. serra var. laevis is a nomen nudum and need not be discussed further. Methods and Materials Ventral scaleswerecountedbythemethodofDowling(1951);subcaudal counts include the distal spine. Dorsal scale row reduction formula summa­tions are after Thomas (1976b). Scales used in the electron microscopy were prepared by the techniques described by Cole and Van Devender (1976:458­459) and individuals in various stages of their shedding cycle were examined (basic morphology was found to be consistent). Hemipenes dissected in situ were cut along their ventral surface. Descriptions include the morphology of the ventral lobe of the bilobed organ. All hemipenial lengths are expressedin terms of subcaudals. Abbreviations used include SC (subcaudals), LOA (length overall), and SVL (snout-vent length). All counts given in the de­scriptions are frequencies within the hypodigm; specific labials are identi­fied by Roman numerals. The following abbreviations are used for museums from which specimens were cited: AMNH American Museum of Natural History, New York BMNH British Museum (Natural History), London CM Carnegie Museum of Natural History, Pittsburgh FMNH Field Museum ofNatural History, Chicago IRSNB Institut Royal des Sciences Naturelles de Belgique, Brusselles MCZ Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard Univ., Cambridge MNHP Museum National d’Histoire Naturelle, Paris MSNG Museo Civico de Storia Naturale “Giacomo Doria,” Genova NMB Naturhistorisches Museum, Basel NMW Naturhistorisches Museum, Vienna NRS Naturhistoriska Riksmuseet, Stockholm RMNH Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Histoire, Leiden SMNS Staatliches Museum fur Naturkunde, Stuttgart UMMZ Museum of Zoology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor USNM National Museum of Natural History, Washington ZIMH Zoologisches Institut und Zoologisches Museum, Hamburg ZMB Zoologisches Museum an der Humbolt-Universitat, Berlin ZMUG Zoologisches Institut und Museum, Universitiit Gottingen ZSM Zoologisches Staatsmuseum des Bayerischen Staates, Miinchen ZUMC Universitetes Zoologiske Museum, K^benhaven Results and Discussion A number of characters serve to separate serra and striaticeps from all other species ofPhilodryas. Tail morphology. The distal portion of the tail in juveniles ot both species have the exposed tips of the scales flared out from the main axis (tig. IB). In serra, this feature is ontogenetically lost and was used as a diagnostic feature between the species by Amaral (1937), as shown in figure IA. Flared sub-caudal scales are not seen in any other species of Philodryas nor any other Neotropical snake genus. An additional feature is that the number of scale rows around the tail is consistently higher than in other species ot Philodryas at 10 SC from the tip and usually at 30 SC (table 1). Macroscopic scale structure. Philodryas serra has keeled dorsal scales which, especially posteriorly, are produced into serrations in both sexes (fig. 2). Variation in development of serrations is great, possibly leading Hoge and Garcia (1949) to erroneously consider it a sexually dimorphic character. To our knowledge, this is the only colubrid species other than the species of Dasypeltis having this character. Microscopic scale structure. Electron microscopic examination of dorsal scales of all species of Philodryas (auct.) revealed that serra and striaticeps Fig. 1.-Distal tail morphology of adult Philodryas serra (A) and of juvenile P. serra and all ages ofP. striaticeps(B). TABLE 1. Number of scale rows (including subcaudals) around the tail of various Philo­dryas.Countstaken30and 10subcaudalscalesfromtipoftail.Numberofscalesaround tail followed parenthetically by sample size. SPECIES 30 SC 10 SC P. aestivus 6(4) 6(2), 4(2) P. baroni 6(2) 6(2) P. borellii 8(1), 6(8), 4(1) 6(9), 4(1) P. burmeisteri 6(2) 6(2) P. chamissonis 6(7) 6(5), 4(2) P. mattogrossensis 6(3) 4(3) P. nattereri 6(11) 6(5), 5(1), 4(5) P. olfersi 6(14) 6(7), 5(2), 4(5) P. patagoniensis 7(1), 6(13), 5(2) 6(5), 4(11) P. psammophideus 6(19) 6(14), 4(5) P. tackymenaides 8(1) 6(1) P. viridissimus 6(4), 5(1), 4(11) 4(16) P. serra 8(4) 8(4) P. striaticeps 10(3), 8(9) 10(6), 9(1), 8(5) possess ultrastructural features different from all other congeners (fig. 3).Their microornamentation consists of densely associated papillae instead of the Overhauchten laminae (sensu Stewart and Daniel 1975: 127) charac­teristic of all other Philodryas. Karyology. The diploid number of serra is 28, while all other species of Philodryas whose karyotypes are known (P. aestivus, P. olfersi, P. patagoni­ensis) have 36 (Gilboa 1975: 111); striaticeps has not been karyotyped. Hemipenes. The hemipenes of serra and striaticeps, like those of other Philodryas species,aretypicalofthexenodontinealsophiini(Dowling 1975: 198) (fig. 4). The two differ from all other species ofPhilodryas in the fol­lowing features: deep calyces absent from asulcate side of organ; band of small spines present between bases of lobes on asulcate surface; lobes calcu­late laterally, with calyculate area bordered by spines; top of lobes, and in­tervening area, nude with a papillate median ridge; sulcus spermaticus divides near base of lobes and the fork thus formed produces an obtuse angle (intig. 4A, the sulcus of the left lobe appears to be a derivative of a continuous sulcus extending from the base to theright lobe); sulci terminating on lateral surface of lobes in calyculate depression; and absence of enlarged spines be­low sulcus bifurcation. Skull. The skulls of serra and striaticeps are similar to those of other spe­cies of Philodryas, but several differences are noteworthy. Both serra and striaticeps have an abrupt enlargement of dentary teeth anterior to the men­tal foramen (fig. 5). The same description may be applied to palatine teeth anterior to the maxillary process. The anterior-most palatine teeth in serra and striaticeps are always larger than adjacent maxillary teeth and are equal to or larger than the postdiastemal teeth. On the basis of data presented above, it is clear to us that the nominal taxa Philodryas serra (Schlegel) and P. striaticeps (Cope) together constitute a distinct genus of Neotropical colubrid snake. The earliest available name is Tropidodryas Fitzinger (1843: 26), whose type-species is Herpetodryas serra Schlegel. The combination Tropidodryas serra has been used by Cope (1884: 192) and Begak et al. (1966). Fig. 2. —Dorsal scales near the vent of Philodryas serra (A) and P. striaticeps (B). Serra­tionsinP. Serraare lessprominentanteriorad. SPECIES ACCOUNTS Tropidodryas Fitzinger Tropidodryas Fitzinger, 1843:26 (type-species by original designation,Herpetodryas serra Schlegel). Philodryas Wagler (part): Gunther 1858: 125. Galeophis Berthold 1859: 181. (type-species by monotypy, Geleophis[sic]jani Berthold).Teleolepis Cope 1869; 153 (type-species by monotypy, Teleolepis striaticepsCope). Definition and Diagnosis. Snakes of the colubrid xenodontine Alsophiinicharacterized by the following combinations of characters: hemipenes bi-lobed, calyculate on outer surfaces of lobes only, spines extending around border of calyculate area, no enlarged spines on lower half of unlobed sur­face, asulcate surface acalyculate with spinules at base of lobes; tip of tail with eight scale rows, the individual scales being flared at their posteriormargins (most obvious in juveniles of both species; retained in adult striati­ceps); anterior palatine teeth always larger than anterior maxillary teeth, and equal to or larger than postdiastemal maxillary teeth; pupil round; dorsal scale rows reducing in numbers posteriorly (usually 21-21-17 or 21-21-15); microornamentation of dorsal scales consists of papillae which are not ar­ranged in individual Oberhauchten cells; dorsal pattern consists of a series of mid-dorsal and lateral intercalary blotches. Tropidodryas is diagnosed from Philodryas in the preceding section (table2). The combination of characters given above should serve to distinguishTropidodryas from all other snake genera. Content. Two species: T. serra (Schlegel) and T. striaticeps (Cope). Tropidodryas serra (Schlegel) Herp. [etodryas] Serra Schlegel 1837: 180-181 + PI. VII, Figs. 1& 2. Dryophylax serra (Schlegel): Dumeril 1853: 508. Philodryas serra (Schlegel): Gunther 1858: 125. Geleophis [sic] jani Berthold 1859: 181. Holotype: ZMUG 518a, an adult female from Bahia, Brasil (tag on specimen gives Santa Catarina, Brasil).Chlorosoma serra (Schlegel); Amaral 1929: 105. Philodryas serra (Schlegel): Amaral 1937; 205. Of the two syntypes of Tropidodryas serra, the principal specimen used (and apparently figured) was RMNH 624 and is here designated the lecto­type. It is an adult female with 231 ventrals, a divided anal plate, 104 sub­caudals, and an abbreviated dorsal scale row formula of 21-21-17. The other specimen, MNHP 3845 (termed the “paratype” by Guibe and Roux-Esteve (1972), is the paralectotype. It is a subadult female with 228 ventrals, a divided anal plate, 99 subcaudals, and an abbreviated dorsal scale row formu­la of 21-21-17. Diagnosis. A species of Tropidodryas separable from its only known con­gener in having keeled scales and 218-237 ventrals (vs. smooth scales and 179-209ventrals in T. striaticeps). Description. Largest male 1053 mm LOA, tail 217 mm; largest female 1254 mm LOA, tail 219 mm; smallest individual a female 314 mm LOA, tail 66 mm; tail/LOA 0.18-0.22 (x=0.202) in males, 0.18-0.20 (x=0.195) in females; usual colubrid complement of head scales present; supralabials 7(2) or 8(26), 111 & IV (2) or IV and V (26) entering orbit; infralabials 9(5), 10(21), or 11(2); 5(5) or 6(23) infralabials contacting both genials on each side; loreal single; preoculars 1(27) or 2(1) (92.9% contacting t'rontal); post-oculars 3(25) or 4(3); temporals 1+2+4(1), 1+3+3(1), 1+3+4(1), 2+3(7), 2+3+4(4), 2+3+5(2), 2+4(5), 3+3+5(1), or 3+4(2); ventrals 219-230 (x=224.0) in males, 218-237 (x=229.6) in females; anal plate divided (7) or entire (7); subcaudals in two rows, 95-1 1 1 (x=105.0) in males, 93-105 (x=99.4) in females; juveniles with 156-182 ventrals anterior to umbilical scar (2 or 3 scales in scar); dorsal scales keeled (serrate toward rear), normal­ ly with two apical pits; abbreviated dorsal scale row formula 21-21-17(11), 22-19-17(1), or 23-21-17(2), with the following summation for completeformulae: [2] B+9 [4] 10+11 x=129.0 (4] 3+4 x=133.5 " 211.01 t6l 3+4 (120-146)(12°-143> 1Q HI 9+lo9+lo (122-147) „(218.237) [7] 3+4 [6] (125-151) 1? [2] 10+11 x= 130.9 [2] 3+4 x=136.7 [l] 4+5 [2] B+9 Maxilla with 13(4), 14(7), or 15(1)(x=13.8) prediastemal teeth plus two weakly grooved postdiastemal teeth; dentary teeth 20(3), 22(6), 23(2),24(1), or 25(1) (x=22.1); palatine teeth 7(2); pterygoid teeth 15(1) or 16(1). A brief description of the in situ hemipenis (based on IRSNB 9842)follows; retracted organ extends to rear of SC 10; lobes bifurcate at rear of SC 6; m. retractor penis magnus originates at SC 29 and is bifurcate anteri­orad for 3SC; sulcus spermaticus bifurcates at rear of SC 3; single row of en­larged spines on a ridge along each lateral surface of lobe and continuous across distal tip, terminating proximally just below bifurcation of lobes; me­dial surface of lobes nude with two parallel ridges each bearing a single apicalrow of slightly recurved papillae; ventral surface with papillate calyces; sul­ cus spermaticus extends along ventral surface of lobe and terminates just be­ lowtipoflobe;spinulespresentfrom SC2topointofsulcusspermaticusbi­furcation. Overall color in preservative shades of brown and cream; head usually with three longitudinal stripes of varying lengths and often broken with various laterally connecting stripes; area between stripes cream-brown with suffusion of brown pigment; a dusky brown pigmented stripe extending around rostral through eye and across temporal region past rear corner of mouth; supralabials variously pigmented, but basically cream; lower surface of head cream with scattered pigment clusters; infralabials usually marginedby dark pigmentation, but frequently (especially anteriorad) totally pigment­ed; dorsal body pattern consists of a series of dark brown, squarish blotches -ScalespeciesPhilodryas. P. [2]mattogrossensis, 9/1928;P. [4]nattereri,79/1928;P. ZMB [6]striaticeps, otherofare papillae and vs. Allposterior apicalneck5000X. Fig. 3. microornamentation of selected of[1]aestivus, CM 58983;P. ZSM [3]baroni, ZSM 2080/0;P. ZSM [5] serra,5435;P. ZMB 24166.All species Philodryassimilar to Note1-4. of serrastriaticeps overlainOberhauchtencells of others.photographs taken justtopits ofmiddorsal scaleson at TABLE 2. Diagnostic characters between Philodryas and Tropidodryas CHARACTER Philodryas Tropidodryas Flared tail Absent Present (juvenile serra and all striaticeps) Scales around tail 6 or less 8 or more (10 SC from tip) Serrate dorsal scales Absent Present {serra only) Dorsal scale ultra- Laminae Papillae structure Hemipenes Lobes totally calyculate; enlarged calyces on asulcate surface; non-sculptured; many spines below fork of sulcus. Lobes with nude areas; no enlarged calyces on asulcate surface; sculp­tured; few or no spines below fork of sulcus. Abrupt enlargement of dentary teeth anteriorad Absent Present Anterior-most palatineteethlarger than adjacentmaxillary teeth and equal to or larger than post­diastemal teeth. Absent Present (26-39, x=31.2), often with faint blotches in interspaces (fig. 6A); lateral intercalary spots or areas suffused with brown pigment present; interblotch area usually heavily suffused with dark pigment; anterior portion of tall usually as dorsum, but suffusion of pigment posteriorly obscures pattern;ventral pattern consists of diffusely pigmented areas scattered on a cream ground color (fig. 6B); venter of tail normally heavily pigmented. Distribution and habitat. The range of T. serra (fig. 7) is characterized byHueck and Seibert (1972:20-22) as evergreen tropical rainforest. Life history notes. Little has been recorded about the habits of this spe­cies. Uzzell (1959:14) reported a specimen that ate two teiid lizards, Pla­cosoma glabellum. Two specimens examined by us contained an unidenti­fiable teiid lizard (BMNH 73.8.25.7) and a Hemidactylus mabouia (MNHP5930). Amaral (1933: 4) stated that they are generalized feeders. Remarks. Specimens cited in the literature as Tropidodryas serra that can be identified as T. striaticeps include those of Dumeril et al. (1854: 1 13-15, in part), Gunther (1861: 14), Jan and Sordelli (1879: PI. IV, Fig. 1), Boulen­ger (1896: 135, specimens a, b, and 0, Jensen (1900:109), and Muller (1927; 300, number 672). Fig.4.-HemipenisofPhilodryasstriaticeps(A,B;MNHP1962.445)andtypicalPhilodryasorgan(C,D;P.nattereri,UMMZ 108993). Tropidodryas striaticeps (Cope) Teleolepis striaticeps Cope 1869: 153-54. Philodryas pseudo-serra Amaral 1937: 205-1 1. Holotype: Institute Butantan 802, a female from Porto Martins, Estado de Sao Paulo, Brasil. Type and type locality. The holotype, MCZ 2909 (cited as “909” by Cope 1869: 154, but noted to be a presumed lapsus calami by Barbour and Love-ridge 1929: 349), is a juvenile female from “Brasil,” collected by GeorgeSceva on the Thayer Expedition of 1864-1865, Fig.5.—MandiblesofselectedPhilodryas.Bar=P.baroni, Mat=P.mattogrossensis,Str=P.striaticeps,andSer=P.serra.Noteabruptenlargementofdentaryanterior mentalforameninstriaticepsandserra.equals5 teethtoP. P. Line mm. Diagnosis. A species of Tropidodryas separable from its only known con­gener in having smooth scales and 179-209 ventrals (vs. keeled scales and 218-237 ventrals in T. serra.) Description. Largest male 780 mm SVL, tail incomplete; largest female 1236 mm LOA, tail 219 mm; smallest individual a male 284 mm LOA, tail 65 mm; tail/LOA 0.20-0.25 (x=0.228) in males, 0.19-0.22 (x=0.209) in fe­males; usual colubrid complement of head scales present; supralabials 7(2),8(82),or9(2), 111&IV(2),IV&V(82),orV&VI(2)enteringorbit;infra­labials 9(3), 10(72), or 11(11); 5(4), 6(81), or 7(1) infralabials contactingboth genials on each side; loreal 0(2), 1(82), or 2(2); preoculars 1(82) or Fig. 6. -Paralectotype of Tropidodryas serra (MNHP 3845). 2(4) (87.2% contacting frontal); postoculars 2(6), 3(79), or 4(1); temporals1+2+2(1), 1+-2+3(3), 1+3(6), 1+3+3(3), 1+3+4(17), 1+3+5(2), 2+2+3(1),2+3(7), 2+3+4(27), 2+3+5(8), 2+4(1), 2+4+2(1), 3+3(1), 3+3+4(1),3+3+5(1), or 3+4(4); ventrals 179-202 (x=189.6) in males, 191-209 (x= 199.4 ) in females; anal plate divided (42) or entire (1); subcaudals in two rows, 72-1 17 (x=109.5) in males, 88-1 16 (x=106.3) in females; juveniles with 154-163 ventrals anterior to umbilical scar (2 or 3 scales in scar); dorsal scales smooth, usually with two apical pits; abbreviated dorsal scale row Fig. 7.-Distribu­tion of Tropido­dryas based on specimens exam­ined and verified literature cita­ = tions. Dots T. striaticeps exam­ined, open dots = T. striaticepsliterature records, = stars T. serra examined. formula 19-21-15(1), 21-21-15(12), 21-21-16(3), 21-21-17(26), or 23-21­17(1), with the following summation for complete formulae: 11) 7+B [i] -io in -9 111 2+3 [l] 4+5 [4) 10+11 [5) B+9 151 9+lo x=l 15.1 [6] 9+lo x= 120.0 21(10) [l2] 3+4 (109-124) 19 [9] 3+4 (113-129) 17 16 [l2] 3+4 (106-124) (7) 3+4 (116-129) [2] B+9 (126-151)17] 9+lo x= 116.1 16] B+9 x=121.1 x=138.5 [2 j 10+11 [s] 9+lo I 1] B+9 [3] 4+5 [l] 4+5 [l] -9 [l] 10+11 - [l] 2+ 3 x= 171.5 =193 3 16 7+B 15 (181-209) 12] 7+B (160-180) [l] 2+ 3 x= 167.3 Fig. 8. —Dimorphic color patterns in Tropidodryas striaticeps. A, B: light phase (MCZ2909, holotype); C, D: dark phase (NRS 1229). Maxilla with 13(3), 14(6), 15(7), 16(9), or 17(2) (x=15.1) prediastemalteeth plus two weakly grooved postdiastemal teeth; dentary teeth 20(1),21(2), 22(2), 23(2), 24(10), 25(5), or 30(1) (x=24.2); palatine teeth 7(2);pterygoid teeth 18(2). The description of a typical in situ hemipenis (ZMB 6005) follows: re­tracted organ extends to middle of SC 8; lobes bifurcate at rear of SC 4; m. retractor penis magnus originates at SC 22 and is bifurcate anteriorad for 2 SC; sulcus spermaticus bifurcates at rear of SC 2; double row of enlarged spines on a ridge along each lateral surface of lobe and continuous across distal tip, terminating proximally just below bifurcation of lobes; medial surface of lobe nude with a central ridge bearing a single apical row of re­curved papillae; ventral surface with papillate calyces; sulcus spermaticusextends along ventral surface of lobe and terminates just below tip of lobe; spinules present from SC 2 to point of sulcus spermaticus bifurcation. Color pattern in preservative basically the same as for T. serra, but differ­ing in the following ways: cream and brown (fig. BA, B) to black (fig. BC, D); (of individuals examined, 34% brown; 66% gray to black); dorsal blotch­es often more rectangular, ranging from 31-42 (x=37.7); venter with much more pigmentation being evenly distributed, dark black with cream lines or reticulations, or predominantly cream with well defined dark spots; about last sixthofventral surface oftailimmaculate cream. Distribution and habitat. The range of T. striaticeps (fig. 7) is character­ized by Hueck and Seibert (1972: 20-22, 24-26) as evergreen tropical rain-forest and deciduous mesophytic subtropical forest with numerous evergreenspecies present. Life history notes. Muller (1970) presented the only information on the natural history of this species. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We wish to thank the following curatorial personnel for the loan of speci­mens and other aids: Raymond F. Bernard, F. W. Braestrup, Lillia Capo­caccia, Charles J. Cole, Ronald I. Crombie, Carl Edelstam, George W. Foley, Ulrich Gruber, Jean Guibe, Patricia G. Haneline, W. Ronald Heyer, Hans -W. Koepcke, Paul Kuenzer, Willy Ladiges, Hymen Marx, C. J. McCoy,Frances 1. McCullough, Robert W. Murphy, Charles W. Myers, Ronald A. Nussbaum, Gunther Peters, Urs Rahm, Andrew F. Stimson, Franz Tiede­mann, Heinz Wermuth, Gaston de Witte, Ernest E. Williams, George R. Zug,and Richard G. Zweifel. Thomas M. Dreier and Randy Scott aided in the electron microscopy. Ted B. Doerr illustrated the hemipenis. Hobart M. Smith commented on several nomenclatural problems. Marinus S. Hoogmoedcontributed data of the lectotype of Tropidodryas serra. John W. Bickham, John D. McEachran, Douglas A. Rossman, and two anonymous reviewers commented on the manuscript. Jyl DeHaven typed the various drafts. SPECIMENS EXAMINED Tropidodryas serra BRASIL. State unknown: (NRS 2009; MNHP 3845, 5390). Bahia: Local­ity unknown (BMNH 73.8.25.7 9). Espirito Santo: Victoria (MSNG & 30713), Santa Leopoldina (ZIMH 3001). Minas Gerais: Sereno (USNM100716). Rio de Janeiro: Martens (ZMB 5435). Santa Catarina: Localityunknown (UMMZ 67224, ZMUG 518a), Blumenau (NMB 11410). Sdo Paulo: Locality unknown (UMMZ 63031), Tapirai (IRSNB 9842). Tropidodryas striaticeps BRASIL. State unknown: (AMNH 6492; MNHP 40, 3844, 3846, 1885. 654-655; NRS 1229; ZUMC 63467-69, 63471; IRSNB 144 [2]; MCZ 2909). Espirito Santo: Araguaya (USNM 100751). Minas Gerais: Bello Hori­zonte (MCZ 39410), Lagoa Santa (ZUMC 63470), Lazenda Posse (LMNH9018). Parana: Serro Azul (MNHP 1961. 699). Rio de Janeiro: Locality un­known (MCZ 2666), Theresepolis (NMW 207481-82, 207491-92; BMNH 93.12.22.3), Porto Real (BMNH 87.12.29.26), Morro Azul (MCZ 39411),Garoz (ZMB 6005). Santa Catarina: Locality unknown (ZMB 26319), Hansa (MNHP 8784), Michaelis (ZMB 2612, 26319). Sdo Paulo: Locality unknown (AMNH 31780, MCZ 20788-90, ZMB 24166), Sao Paulo (UMMZ 79650,SMNS 3410), Santa Branco (IRSNB 9843), Ribeira (MNHP 1962.445),Suzano (MCZ 39410), Leme (AMNH 6492), Santos (BMNH 1908.9.16.2). LITERATURE CITED AMARAL, A. do. 1929 Contribui9ao ao conhecimento dos ophidios do Brasil. IV.-Lista remissiva dos ophidios do Brasil. Mem. Inst. Butantan 4:69-125. 1933 Mecanismo e genero de alimenta9ao das serpentes do Brasil. 801. Biol. (N.S.)1:2-4. 1937 Contribui9ao do conhecimento dos ophidios do Brasil. 9. Nova especie de colubrideo opisthoglypho confundivel com Philodryas serra (Schlegel 1837).Mem. Inst. Butantan 11: 205-212 + 2 pi. BARBOUR, T., and A. LOVERIDGE 1929 Typical reptiles and amphibians in the Museum of Comparative Zoology. Bull. Mus. Comp. Zool. 69: 205-360. BE£AK, W., M. L. BE£AK, and H. NAZARETH 1966 Evolution and sex chromosomesin serpents. Mem. Inst. Butantan 33: 151-152. BERTHOLD, A. A. 1859 Einige neue Reptilien des acad. zoolog. Museums in Gottingen. Nach. Univ. Kon. Gesell. Wiss. Gottingen 17: 179-181. BOULENGER, G. A. 1896 Catalogue of the snakes in the British Museum (Natural History). Vol. 3. British Museum (Natural History), London. COLE, C. J., and T. R. VAN DEVENDER 1976 Surface structure of fossil and recent epidermal scales from North American lizards of the genus Sceloporus (Reptilia, Iguanidae). Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist. 156: 451-514. COPE, E. D. 1869 Seventh contribution to the herpetology of tropical America. Proc. Amer. Phil. Soc. 11: 147-169. 1884 Twelfth contribution to the herpetology of tropical America. Proc. Amer. Phil. Soc. 22: 167-194. DOWLING, H. G. 1951 A proposed standard system of counting ventrals in snakes. Brit. J. Herp.1:97-99. 1975 The Nearctic snake fauna. HISS Yearbk. Herp. 1; 191-202. DUMERIL, A. M. C. 1853 Prodrome de la classification des reptiles ophidiens. Mem. Acad. Sci. Paris 23: 399-536. — G. BIBRON, and A. DUMERIL 1854. Erpetologie generale ou histoire naturelle complete des reptiles. Vol. 7. Lib, Encycl. Roret, Paris. FITZINGER, L. J. 1843 Systema Reptilium. Wien. GILBOA, I. 1975 Karyotypes of amphibians and reptiles: a bibliographic review. HISS Yearbk. Herp. 1: 91-156. GUIBE, J., and R. ROUX-ESTEVE 1972 Les types de Schlegel (ophidiens) presents dans les collections du Museum National d’Histoire Naturelle de Paris. Zool. Mededel. 47: 129-134. GUNTHER, A. 1858 Catalogue of Colubrine snakes in the collection of the British Museum. Tay­lor and Francis, London. 1861 Account of the reptiles sent by Dr. Wucherer from Bahia. Proc. Zool. Soc. London 1861: 12-18. HOGE, A. R., and A. GARCIA 1949 Notas erpetologicas. 4. Sobre caracteres sexusis secundarios nas serpentes. Mem. Inst. Butantan 21: 55-66. HUECK, K., and P. SEIBERT 1972 Vegetationskarte von Sudamerika. Gustav Fisher Verlag, Stuttgart. JAN, G. 1863 Elenco sistematico degli ofidi descritti e disegnati per I’iconograffie generale.Tipograf. A. Lombardi, Milan. and F. SORDELLI 18791 Iconographie generale des ophidiens. Vol. 3, Livr. 49. Milan. JENSEN, A. S. 1900 Lagoa Santa egnens slanger. Et bidrag til det indre Brasiliens herpetologi Vidensk. Midd. Naturhist. Foren. Kjobnhaven 1900; 99-111. MULLER, L. 1927 Amphibien und Reptilien der Ausbeute Prof. Breslau’s in Brasilien 1913-1914 Abb. Senckenb. Ges. Frankfurt am Main 40: 259-304. MULLER, P. 1970 Die Verschiedenheit der Nahrung von Philodryas pseudoserra Amaral 1937. Aquar.-Terrar. Zeutschr. 23: 91-92. PETERS, J. A., and B. R. OREJAS-MIRANDA 1970 Catalogue of the Neotropical Squamata: Part 11. Amphisbaenians and Lizards. Bull. U. S. Natl. Mus. 297: viii + 293 pp. SCHLEGEL, H. 1837 Essai sur la physionomie des serpents. Vol. 2. Leiden. STEWART, G. R., and R. S. DANIEL 1975 Microornamentation of lizard scales: some variations and taxonomic correla­tions. Herpetologica 31: 117-130. THOMAS, R. A. 1976 a A revision of the South American colubrid snake genus Philodryas Wagler,1830. Ph.D. Dissertation, Texas A&M University. 1976b Dorsal scale row formulae in snakes. Copeia 1976; 839-841. UZZELL, T. M., JR. 1959 Teiid lizards of the genus Placosoma. Occas. Pap. Mus. Zool., Univ. Michigan(606): 1-16.