Boidae

Pyron, R. Alexander, Reynolds, R. Graham & Burbrink, Frank T., 2014, A Taxonomic Revision of Boas (Serpentes: Boidae), Zootaxa 3846 (2), pp. 249-260 : 256

Family Boidae

Type genus. Boa Linnaeus 1758

Genus content. Boa , Chilabothrus , Corallus , Epicrates , Eunectes

Diagnosis. Boids can be distinguished from all other similar or related taxa by the following combination of characters: internarial septum with large fenestra, anterior margin of the ventral lamina of the nasal indented in lateral view, anterolateral margin of horizontal lamina of nasal noticeably indented viewed dorsally, horizontal lamina of the nasal does not overlap dorsal surface of frontal, most of palatine process of maxilla occurs posteriorly within the orbit, anterior end of ectopterygoid consists of indistinct lateral and medial heads, supratemporal inclined slightly in lateral view, posterior end of supratemporal rounded but not dilated, parasphenoid wing large and without pedicellate ventral surface, dorsal margin of prearticular noticeably curved upward near attachment of adductor posterior muscle, cornua of hyobranchium discontinuous anteriorly, and shallow labial pits (see Kluge 1991).

Phylogenetic definition. Includes the MRCA of included Boa , Chilabothrus , Corallus , Epicrates , and Eunectes species and all descendants thereof, and all species more closely related to Boa constrictor than to Candoia carinata or Eryx jaculus .

Etymology. From the Latin boa for ‘large snake,’ after an animal mentioned in the Natural History of Pliny the Elder.

Distribution. New World tropics, from northern Mexico to Argentina, and the West Indies.

Remarks. Several species in this group contain significant intra-specific genetic variation ( Colston et al. 2013; Reynolds et al. 2014), and more species may be recognized in the future.

This arrangement (family-level rank of the former boid subfamilies) provides a robust taxonomy for booid snakes. All families are strongly supported as monophyletic by both molecular and morphological data, and their nomenclature is thus unlikely to be affected in the future by the sampling of additional taxa or characters in phylogenetic analyses. The recognition of these ecomorphologically and biogeographically distinct groups as families mirrors other squamate and amphibian taxa such as Iguania ( Frost & Etheridge 1989; Frost et al. 2001) and Ranoidea ( Frost et al. 2006; Pyron & Wiens 2011), where large cosmopolitan families ( Iguanidae and Ranidae ) have been broken up into more manageable and geographically localized units. This classification should provide a stable basis for future revision and description of new species, and other comparative analyses.