Ophidia 1: Evolutionary Origin of Snakes

Here is the link to the whole playlist.
   • Ophidia 1: Evolutionary Origin of Snakes  
I love talking about taxonomy, and I haven't done a video like this since "Pterosaurs are Terrible Lizards" years ago. So I was excited to do this one, and I'm especially excited about the second episode coming after this one. Actually there are a couple more after this, but these first two are just about the science.

As usual, I had to modify Wikipedia's cladograms. In particular the one for Squamata.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Squamata
There were a few errors there. Not only did they label Proteroglypha incorrectly, but on the page where they tried to justify their use of Afropedia instead of Macrostomata, they used the clade Henophidia to unite Boids and Pythons.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afrophidia
Then on another page, they contradict themselves, (as they so often do) saying that Henophidia is a “former clade” on the excuse that "Booids and Pythons no longer form a monophyletic group".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henophidia
However, their primary citation for that is a 2014 phylogenetic study showing that yes, they actually do. That study even goes on to say that "Henophidian snakes (including the basal ‘Amerophidia’) are one of the most spectacular groups of reptiles and constitute a vast diversity of morphologies, behaviors, body sizes and ecologies."
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science...
At least a couple other studies say the same: “The modern boas (Booidea) and pythons (Pythonoidea) are an ancient group of snakes, often referred to as primitive snakes (Henophidia). Currently, comprising more than 220 valid species,”
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/arti...
Our results further suggest that henophidian diversity, which includes the bulk of extant snake species, radiated entirely after the K-Pg mass extinction.
https://bmcecolevol.biomedcentral.com...
Wikipedia says that Amerophidia should not be included in Henophidia. But I read another article saying that Amerophidia is itself an invalid taxon, because Booids did and do still exist on other continents. The cited study even put “Amerophidia” in quotes in recognition of that fact. And it doesn't matter anyway, because the group in question are not listed as Henophids or Amerophids in either their own phylogenies nor in the cited study. So I'm treating Henophidia as a valid clade for Booids and Pythons and Uropeltoids collectively.
If you like what I do, please consider supporting my efforts.
PATREON►   / aronra​​​​​​​​​​  
PAYPAL► https://www.paypal.me/AronRa