Trimeresurus popeiorum SMITH, 1937
Can you confirm these amateur observations of Trimeresurus popeiorum?
|Higher Taxa||Viperidae, Crotalinae, Colubroidea, Alethinophidia, Serpentes, Squamata (snakes)|
|Common Names||E: Pope’s Tree Viper, Pope's Bamboo Pit Viper, Pope’s Green Pit Viper|
G: Popes Bambusotter, Popes Lanzenotter
|Synonym||Trimeresurus popeiorum SMITH 1937|
Trimeresurus popeorum — GRANDISON 1972: 94
Trimeresurus popeiorum — COX et al. 1998: 21
Trimeresurus popeorum — HOFFMANN 1998
Trimeresurus popeorum — MCDIARMID, CAMPBELL & TOURÉ 1999: 340
Trimeresurus popeiorum — TU et al. 2000
Trimeresurus popeiorum — VOGEL et al. 2004
Popeia popeiorum — MALHOTRA & THORPE 2004
Popeia popeiorum — GRISMER et al. 2006
Trimeresurus popeiorum — DAVID et al. 2009
Trimeresurus (Popeia) popeiorum — DAVID et al. 2011
Popeia popeorum — WALLACH et al. 2014: 575
Popeia popeiorum — GUO et al. 2015
Popeia popeiorum — CHAN-ARD et al. 2015: 291
Trimeresurus popeiorum — MULCAHY et al. 2017
Popeia popeiorum — GUO et al. 2018
|Distribution||NE India, Nepal, Myanmar (= Burma), N Thailand, N Laos, Malaysia (Pulau Tioman? [LIM & LIM 1999]); China (Yunnan)|
Type locality: Khasi Hills, Assam (State of Meghalaya), India (designated by TAYLOR & ELBEL 1958)
|Types||Holotype: BMNH 220.127.116.11 (Lectotype)|
Distribution: Possibly in Bhutan (Lenz 2012).
Synonymy: "Contrary to Hoge & Romano Hoge (1981: 257) and Welch (1988: 137), we consider that the specific name gramineus must be restricted to the form inhabiting the Peninsular India, and that the correct name for the species distributed in Sumatra and other parts of southeastern Asia is Trimeresurus popeiorum Smith, 1937." (from David & Vogel 1996)
Diversity: Mulcahy et al. 2017 found populations of T. popeiorum that are paraphyletic with T. nebularis but are morphologically indistinguishable from T. popeiorum and hence appear to be a cryptic species.
This issue is adressed again in Biology of the Vipers (Schuett et al, ed., 2002). On page 353 Orlov et al. state that "The specific epithet is most commonly spelled popeorum. David and Vogel (1996) indicated that the emendation of the spelling from popeiorum to popeorum by Smith (1943) was unjustified. William W. Lamar (in litt.) has communicated to us, however, that Smith (1943) was clearly correcting a copyist's error, that such a change was allowed at the time, and that it was specifically allowed under the first published International Code of Zoological Nomenclature. While the 1985 and subsequent Codes prohibit this, they apply only to actions taken post-1985. Thus, the correct name is popeorum."
Most often confused with T. stejnegeri (q.v.), the two have quite distinct
hemipenes, which does not make identification of individuals in the field or in the laboratory any easier without recourse to (a) male individuals and (b) an examination of the hemipenes. However, the two species are not known to have overlapping distributions, at least based on available materials. Also, closely allied to T. popeiorum is T. yunnanensis (q.v.); ordinarily, the two are more easily be told apart by the number of midbody scale rows, 21 in T. popeiorum, 19 in T. yunnanensis (from LEVITON et al. 2003).
Type species: Trimeresurus popeiorum is the type species of the genus Popeia MALHOTRA & THORPE 2004.
For abbreviations see T. nebularis.
|Etymology||"This species was named in honour to Clifford H. Pope and Sarah H. Pope. The original spelling of the specific epithet, popeiorum, was corrected into popeorum by Smith (1943: 518) on the basis that it was indeed a clerical error. Unfortunately, according to the Art. 32 (c, ii) of the Code (I.C.Z.N., 1985), such a change does not fall into the category of a „correction of an incorrect original spelling" According to the Art. 33 (d), the use of a termination -orum in a subsequent spelling of a species-group name that is a genitive based upon a personal name in which the correct original spelling terminates with -iorum, is an incorrect subsequent spelling, even if the change is deliberate. The original spelling, popeiorum, must therefore be conserved." (from David & Vogel 1996)|