Elaine Hannah-11/04/16, Science World Report
The
hailed first four-legged fossil snake is found to be not a snake,
instead it is said to be an extinct four-legged marine lizard. In the
new analysis, it indicates that it is a dolichosaurid with a
stretched and snake-like body.
National Geographic reports
that the 110-million-year fossil was unraveled as Tetrapodophis, a
burrowing snake with two pairs of small limbs. This suggests that snakes
started out on land. This caused issue and scientific debate about
snakes losing their limbs on land or in water. In the current analysis,
it suggests that the fossil could be the oldest known dolichosaur, which
was an extinct marine lizard that existed during the Cretaceous period.
Michael
Caldwell, a professor and chair of biological sciences at the
University of Alberta in Edmonton in Canada explained that Tetrapodophis
doesn't show any of those features that you would expect to see a
snake. He further explained that it is likely a dolichosaurid, which
belongs to the squamate (scaly reptile) umbrella. He added that it's
unclear how dolichosaurids are associated with snakes. On the other
hand, some evidence indicates that they are a sister group to the
slithery reptiles, according to Live Science.
Caldwell
continues that tetrapodophis amplectus does not have hooked teeth while
a snake does. It also does not have a snake-like skull and skeleton.
Some anatomical details that ancient and modern snakes have are also
missing. These include the subdental ridge in the mouth and zygosphenes,
which are special joints in between the snake vertebrae.
Meanwhile,
the authors of the first study claimed that the Tetrapodophis is indeed
a snake. David Martill, a paleontologist from the University of
Portsmouth said that Caldwell is simply very wrong. He further said that
they did consider a dolichosaur, yet it is not a dolichosaur. His
co-author, Nick Longrich said that he stands behind the paper they
wrote.
On
the other hand, some paleontologists agreed on the findings of
Caldwell. Jason Head, a paleontologist at the University of Cambridge
said that he is sure that Caldwell is more right than the original
publication. He further said that there was a lot of anatomical
interpretation from the first study that he has a hard time seeing the
photos.
Jacques
Gauthier, a famous squamate expert from Yale said that he thinks that
Caldwell makes a pretty good argument that it is a dolichosaur rather
than a snake. On the other hand, he undermines Caldwell's ideas that
snakes have aquatic origins.
No comments:
Post a Comment
You only need to enter your comment once! Comments will appear once they have been moderated. This is so as to stop the would-be comedian who has been spamming the comments here with inane and often offensive remarks. You know who you are!