Austroliasis amethistina (Schneider) – Hoser 2000 (incorrect subsequent spelling, APP4)

Australiasis amethistina (Schneider) – Hoser 2004

Australiasis amethystina clarki (Barbour, 1914) – Hoser 2004

Australiasis duceboracensis (Günther, 1879) – Hoser 2004

Australiasis amethistina (Scheider) – Hoser 2009 (APP8, see introduction)

Australiasis dipsadides (Ogilby, 1891) – Hoser 2009 (APP8, see introduction)

Kraus and Allison (2004) reported Morelia amethistina from Fergusson Island.

Harvey et al. (2000) identified three races within the species, two from the mainland of New Guinea, separated by the Central Mountain Range (also see remarks on Morelia clarki), and another race from New Ireland (see remarks on Morelia duceboracensis). This is consistent with other species found in this region (e.g., the two lineages of the green tree python (sensu Rawlings and Donnelan 2003), and Leiopython albertisii/Leiopython hoserae). According to Harvey et al. (2000), the holotype of Australiasis amethistina is lost. We call for the designation of a neotype.

Morelia antiquus Smith & Plane, 1985 – Smith and Plane 1985

Morelia antiqua – Scanlon 1992 (antiquus amended for gender by Scanlon 1992)

Liasis olivacea Gray, 1842 – Kluge 1993

Commonwealth Paleontological Collection 25077 (not “20577”; see Scanlon 2001), right dentary.

Camfield Beds, Blast Site, Bullock Creek, Northern Territory, Australia. Late middle Miocene (Scanlon 2001).

Smith and Plane (1985) documented significantly lesser curvature in the teeth of this taxon, to that found in species of the genera Python and Morelia, and because “…of the slight curvature of the dentary teeth…” (Smith and Plane 1985: 194) the authors considered this taxon more closely related to Morelia than to Python.

See Comments on Chondropython azureus and Morelia viridis.

Lenhoserus boeleni (Brongersma) – Hoser 2000

Morelia boeleni (Brongersma) – Henderson and Powell 2007; Flagle and Stoops 2009

Austin et al. (2009) found little genetic divergence within specimens across the species’ range. A single specimen out of 98 examined using the cytochrome b gene, from the eastern Morobe Province, PNG showed about 1.1% genetic divergence from specimens from West Papua. This demonstrates reduced genetic diversity within this taxon.

Fyfe (2007) lists this species as subspecies Morelia spilota bredli.

Australiasis clastolepis (Harvey et al.) – Hoser 2004, 2009 (APP8, see introduction)

Morelia clastolepis Harvey et al. – Henderson and Powell 2007

UTA 44486.

Ambon, Maluku (= Moluccas), Indonesia.

For range extensions in Queensland see Augusteyn (2004) and Fearn and Trembath (2006).

SAMA R13994.

St. Francis Island, South Australia.

Hoser (2004) separated this taxon from its closest relative Morelia spilota imbricata (see Schwaner et al. 1988) on the ground of “higher incidence of scale anomalies” to the ventral scales. It can be argued that anomalies do not make good diagnostic characters, and these anomalies were already described in detail by Schwaner et al. (1988). Hoser (2004) further claims that this taxon may be distinguished from Morelia mippughae “by having lanceolate-shaped dorsal scales as opposed to more rhomboidal-shaped dorsal scales” (also see comments on Morelia mippughae). According to Schwaner et al. (1988: 15), and in support of Smith (1981), “specimens of imbricata have distinctly elongated, lanceolate-shaped, posterior dorsal scales. Morelia spilota variegata usually have the rhomboidal condition”. Furthermore, Schwaner et al. (1988) also reported that specimens from the St. Francis Island exhibited reduced ventral and subcaudal scale counts and a shorter tail than specimens from other populations. Hoser (2004) stated that this taxon is distinguishable from “all other Morelia by colouration and patterns” (Hoser 2004), but contradicted this statement when stating that this taxon is “highly variable in individual colouration and pattern”, and that “this species cannot be definitively separated from other Morelia on the basis of scalation alone as these properties (ventral counts and the like) may overlap with other Morelia” (Hoser 2004). Based on this description, it is unlikely that specimens can be correctly assigned to this species unless they were known to originate from the type locality. Schwaner et al. (1988: 14) and Pearson et al. (2002) assigned the St. Francis Island population to the subspecies Morelia spilota imbricata. We concur with this and relegate this taxon to the synonymy of Morelia spilota imbricata. Mense (2006), Henderson and Powell (2007), and Swan (2007) did not list this taxon.

SAMA R14261.

Iron Duchess, Middleback Ranges, South Australia.

Hoser (2004) separated this taxon from its relative Morelia macburniei “by a lower incidence of scale anomalies” (Hoser 2004) of the ventral scales. This is meaningless because most populations will show few anonomalies, hence, using the “normal state” as a character does not differentiate this taxon from others. Hoser (2004) continued that this taxon has “more rhomboidal-shaped dorsal scales as opposed to having lanceolate-shaped dorsal scales” (Hoser 2004), which is, according to Schwaner et al. (1988) also true for Morelia spilota variegata (also see remarks on Morelia macburniei). It is further separated from its closest relative Morelia spilota metcalfei by its color pattern and from all other Morelia by coloration and patterning. Hoser claimed that “a suite of characteristics” separate this taxon from its closest relatives Morelia macburniei and Morelia metcalfei, but failed to enumerate characters other than those cited above. Hence, the name cannot clearly be assigned to a specimen and this name is therefore considered a nomen dubium (APP5). Mense (2006), Henderson and Powell (2007), and Swan (2007) did not list this taxon.

Australiasis nauta (Harvey et al.) – Hoser 2004, 2009 (APP8, see introduction)

Morelia nauta Harvey et al. – Henderson and Powell 2007

UTA 44482.

Yamdena Island, Tanimbar Island Group, Maluku (=Moluccas), Indonesia.

Nyctophilopython oenpelliensis (Gow)– Hoser 2000

Morelia oenpelliensis Gow – Henderson and Powell 2007

Montypythonoides riversleighensis – Smith and Plane 1985

Morelia spilota (Lacépède) – Kluge 1993

Morelia antiqua Smith & Plane, 1985 – Scanlon 2001

Morelia riversleighensis – Scanlon, 2001

QM F 12926 (=AR4058), incomplete right maxilla.

Henk’s Hollow Local Fauna, Tertiary System C, approximately 3.6 km southwest of Tedford’s (1967) Site B, Riversleigh, northwestern Queensland, Australia. Late Oligocene - early middle Miocene (Scanlon 2001).

Smith and Plane (1985) described the two extinct species riversleighensis and antiquus from Australia. Kluge (1993) synonymized antiqua (name amended for gender by Scanlon 1992) with olivaceus Gray due to the lack of autapomorphies and great overall similarity and riversleighensis with spilota Lacépède. Scanlon (2001) synonymized antiqua with riversleighensis.

Morelia riversleighensis (Smith & Plane, 1985) – Kluge 1993 (part)

(Hoser (2000, 2004) listed several subspecies of Morelia spilota at specific rank, without comment. Since no new evidence is available, these authors continue to treat them all as subspecies. These authors also treat the taxon Morelia harrisoni described by Hoser (2000) as a subspecies of Morelia spilota (see comments there).

Australiasis tracyae (Harvey et al.) – Hoser 2004, 2009 (APP8, see introduction)

Morelia tracyae Harvey et al. – Henderson and Powell 2007

UTA 44473.

Tobelo, Halmahera, Maluku (=Moluccas), Indonesia.

Chondropython viridis (Schlegel) – Hoser 2000 (part)

Chondropython viridis viridis (Schlegel) – Hoser 2004 (part)

Chondropython viridis shireenae Hoser, 2004

Morelia viridis (Schlegel) – Henderson and Powell 2007

see Wilson and Heinsohn (2007)

Rawlings and Donnellan (2003) found molecular evidence for cryptic diversity within Morelia viridis, resulting in two genetically distinct races. The type locality for Morelia viridis is Aru Island, which applies to the “southern lineage”, including Australian specimens (Rawlings and Donnellan 2003) (also see Chondropython azureus). However, Rawlings and Donnellan (2003: 42) noted that “(…) the east/west limits of the distribution of the two lineages may not necessarily be at the extreme ends of the central cordillera or the island”, and hence, there may be even more lineages present. Finally, due to the absence of molecular genetic data from the holotype, the type locality Aru Island cannot definitely be confirmed.