Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 458

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 113 of the 113 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Molecular Phylogenetics of Squamata: The Position of Snakes, Amphisbaenians, and Dibamids, and the Root of the Squamate Tree

Open access
Townsend, Ted M., Larson, Allan, Louis, Edward, Macey, J. Robert·2004·Systematic Biology

Abstract

Squamate reptiles (snakes, lizards, and amphisbaenians) serve as model systems for evolutionary studies of a variety of morphological and behavioral traits, and phylogeny is crucial to many generalizations derived from such studies. Specifically, the traditional dichotomy between Iguania (anoles, iguanas, chameleons, etc.) and Scleroglossa (skinks, geckos, snakes, etc.) has been correlated with major evolutionary shifts within Squamata. We present a molecular phylogenetic study of 69 squamate species using approximately 4600 (2876 parsimony-informative) base pairs (bp) of DNA sequence data from the nuclear genes RAG-1(approximately 2750 bp) and c-mos(approximately 360 bp) and the mitochondrial ND2 region (approximately 1500 bp), sampling all major clades and most major subclades. Under our hypothesis, species previously placed in Iguania, Anguimorpha, and almost all recognized squamate families form strongly supported monophyletic groups. However, species previously placed in Scleroglossa, Varanoidea, and several other higher taxa do not form monophyletic groups. Iguania, the traditional sister group of Scleroglossa, is actually highly nested within Scleroglossa. This unconventional rooting does not seem to be due to long-branch attraction, base composition biases among taxa, or convergence caused by similar selective forces acting on nonsister taxa. Studies of functional tongue morphology and feeding mode have contrasted the similar states found in Sphenodon(the nearest outgroup to squamates) and Iguania with those of Scleroglossa, but our findings suggest that similar states in Sphenodonand Iguania result from homoplasy. Snakes, amphisbaenians, and dibamid lizards, limbless forms whose phylogenetic positions historically have been impossible to place with confidence, are not grouped together and appear to have evolved this condition independently. Amphisbaenians are the sister group of lacertids, and dibamid lizards diverged early in squamate evolutionary history. Snakes are grouped with iguanians, lacertiforms, and anguimorphs, but are not nested within anguimorphs.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/10635150490522340

Cites

113 of 113 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 113 references

Cited by

See all 458

Metadata

Authors
Townsend, T. M., Larson, A., Louis, E., & Macey, J. R.
Venue
Systematic Biology
Published
2004-10-01
Volume
53
Issue
5
Pages
735-757
ISSN
  • 1063-5157 (ISSN-L)
  • 1076-836X
OpenAlex
W2127359962
Cited by
458
References
113
FWCI
22.03
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Molecular Phylogenetics of Squamata: The Position of Snakes, Amphisbaenians, and Dibamids, and the Root of the Squamate Tree. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/10635150490522340
The paper
Townsend, T. M., Larson, A., Louis, E., & Macey, J. R. (2004). Molecular Phylogenetics of Squamata: The Position of Snakes, Amphisbaenians, and Dibamids, and the Root of the Squamate Tree. Systematic Biology. https://doi.org/10.1080/10635150490522340

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.