Cubatyphlops biminiensis (RICHMOND, 1955)
Can you confirm these amateur observations of Cubatyphlops biminiensis?
|Higher Taxa||Typhlopidae (Typhlopinae), Typhlopoidea, Serpentes, Squamata (snakes)|
|Common Names||E: Bahaman Slender Blindsnake|
|Synonym||Typhlops biminiensis RICHMOND 1955: 2|
Typhlops biminiensis paradoxus THOMAS 1968
Typhlops biminiensis — SCHWARTZ & HENDERSON 1991: 643
Typhlops biminiensis — MCDIARMID, CAMPBELL & TOURÉ 1999: 92
Cubatyphlops biminiensis — HEDGES et al. 2014
Typhlops biminiensis — PYRON & WALLACH 2014
Cubatyphlops biminiensis — NAGY et al. 2015
Typhlops biminiensis — WALLACH et al. 2014: 758
|Distribution||Bahama Is.: Great Bahama Bank; Cay Sal Bank; Cuba.|
Type locality: Near Nixon's Harbor, along trail to "Buck Lands" (= Black Lands?), South Bimini Island, Bahama Islands.
|Types||Holotype: CM 32604.|
|Diagnosis||Diagnosis (genus). Species of Cubatyphlops have (1) eye, distinct, (2) snout, rounded, (3) head scale arrangement, non-circular, (4) frontorostral, absent, (5) nasal, completely divided (rarely incomplete), (6) nasal suture origin, supralabial 2, (7) suboculars or subpreoculars, absent, (8) postoculars, 1 (rarely 2; average 1.0), (9) preocular-labial contact, supralabials 2 & 3 (rarely none), (10) midbody scale rows, 20–24 (average, 22.1), (11) scale row reduction, present or absent, (12) total scale rows, 351–629 (average, 503), (13) caudals, 22, (14) maximum total length, 197– 460 (average, 304) mm, (15) total length/midbody diameter, 36–75 (average, 54.7), (16) total length/tail length, 29–85 (average, 50.4), (17) dorsal color, brown (sometimes unpigmented, pinkish), (18) ventral color, unpigmented (pinkish) or rarely cream, (19) dorsum darker than venter, (20) overall, lacking any distinctive pattern (spots, lines, or stripes) (Tables 1–2); molecular phylogenetic support (Figs. 1, 3).|
This genus is distinguished from the other two major genera inhabiting the Caribbean islands, Antillotyphlops and Typhlops, in that the preocular contacts supralabials 2 and 3, and one postocular is present (versus preocular contact with supralabial 3 only, and the presence of two postoculars) (Thomas 1968; 1976; Dixon & Hendricks 1979; Thomas & Hedges 2007). Species in this genus also stand out among closely related genera in being unusually thin, with individuals of all species except one having TL/MBD ratios above 50, being unusually long (up to 460 mm TL), and in having an unusually high number of total scale rows (to 629). Although Cubatyphlops can be distinguished from its closely related genera, it is more difficult to separate it from the primarily mainland New World genus Amerotyphlops. It shares with that genus the preocular contact with supralabials 2 and 3, and, in some species of Amerotyphlops, the presence of a single postocular. However, it can be nearly completely distinguished from the mainland genus in having a high number of total scale rows, minimally 453 in 11 of the 12 species (C. caymanensis, 351–408); in Amerotyphlops, the maximum number of total scale rows is 441, except in one species, A. microstomus (487–556). Concerning the two overlap species, C. caymanensis is separated from Amerotyphlops in the molecular phylogeny, and A. microstomus is separated from Cubatyphlops in having 2 postoculars instead of one postocular. Also, 8 of the 14 species of Amerotyphlops can be distinguished from Cubatyphlops in having either an incompletely divided nasal scale (A. minuisquamus, A. paucisquamus, and A. reticulatus, and A. yonenagae) or a patterned (lines or spots) dorsum and/or head (A. brongersmianus, A. minuisquamus, A. paucisquamus, A. reticulatus, A. tasymicris, A. tenuis, A. trinitatus, and A. yonenagae) or both. In Cubatyphlops, the nasal is completely divided and they have no distinct pattern [HEDGES et al. 2014: 45].
Diagnosis: Typhlops biminiensis sensu stricto is one of the largest West Indian species of Typhlops, TL (total length) to 370 mm. The preocular contacts supralabials 2 and 3, which is a characteristic of the T. biminiensis Group (Richmond, 1955; Thomas, 1968) of West Indian species. This feature also occurs in all mainland Central and South American species (Dixon & Hendricks, 1979) but not most West Indian species, which belong to another West Indian radiation of Typhlops, the major Antillean radiation (MAR) (Thomas, 1976). Aside from the preocular-contact character, T. biminiensis is distinguished from members of the MAR by its broadly angled preocular (93–125°) and its broad rostral scale (RW1/RL1 0.81–1.08). The only currently recognized member of the Major Antillean Radiation occurring within the range of T. biminiensis is T. lumbricalis of Cuba and the Great and Little Bahama Bank islands. From described members of the Typhlops biminiensis group (T. caymanensis, T. epactius, and T. paradoxus), T. biminiensis sensu stricto differs in its larger size and broad, nearly round, rostral scale (Fig. 8A) with RW1/RL1 values of over 0.81. It further differs from T. caymanensis by its greater number of scale rows (24 or 22 initially versus 20 rows for T. caymanensis) and greater number of middorsal scales (454–537 versus 351–408). From the Cuban species (Fig. 8) it differs in having a larger rostral size (RW1+RL3; Fig. 10A), longer snout (NE; Fig. 10B), and smaller preocular apical diameter (PD; Fig. 10C). Because the new Cuban species can thus be distinguished from T. biminiensis, T. caymanensis, T. epactius, and T. paradoxus, our discussion below will focus mostly on diagnostic traits among the Cuban species previously confused with T. biminiensis.
|Comment||Subspecies: all previous subspecies have now been elevated to full species status.|
Distribution: not on Cuba; reports from Cuba are misidentified species (NAGY et al. 2015).
Illustrations: Thomas, 1968; Thomas, 1976.
Type species: Typhlops biminiensis RICHMOND 1955: 2 is the type species of the genus Cubatyphlops HEDGES et al. 2014: 45.
Abundance: T. biminiensis and related species are very rare. THOMAS & HEDGES (2007) estimated a “collection rate of one snake of this complex per >100 hours of search time.”
Synonymy: T. biminiensis previously reported from Cuba are now considered to be different species. Specimens in museum collections may still be labelled as “T. biminiensis” but continue to be recognized as different species, e.g. T. golyathi DOMINGUEZ & MORENO 2009.
|Etymology||Named after the type locality.|
The generic name is a masculine noun formed from the adjective cubanus (a, um; ‘from Cuba’) and Greek noun typhlops (the blind).