| 史静耸,杨登为,张武元,齐硕,李丕鹏,丁利.2016.西伯利亚蝮-中介蝮复合种在中国的分布及其种下分类（蛇亚目：蝮亚科）.动物学杂志,51(5):777-798. |
| 西伯利亚蝮-中介蝮复合种在中国的分布及其种下分类（蛇亚目：蝮亚科） |
| Distribution and Infraspecies Taxonomy of Gloydius halys-Gloydius intermedius Complex in China (Serpentes: Crotalinae) |
| 投稿时间：2016-02-18 修订日期：2016-09-04 |
| DOI：DOI: 10.13859/j.cjz.201605008 |
| 中文关键词: 西伯利亚蝮-中介蝮 亚洲蝮 分类学 线粒体DNA 系统发育 中国 |
| 英文关键词:Gloydius halys-G. intermedius Asian Pitviper Systematics mtDNA Phylogeny China |
| 基金项目:辽宁省优秀人才支持计划项目（No. 2009044）；全国第二次陆生野生动物资源调查项目（No. 2013-ZX-Gloydius） |
|
| 摘要点击次数: 2572 |
| 全文下载次数: 5930 |
| 中文摘要: |
| 我国学者一度认为中国北方不同地区的“中介蝮”（Gloydius intermedius）是一个单一物种，但中国东北、西北、华北地区不同的“中介蝮”彼此的形态和生活习性都有明显差异。为了探究这种差异的内在原因，本研究在中国境内进行了较大范围野外调查采样，并检视了相关标本，通过形态学和分子系统发育分析，并结合地理分布资料，对中国北方的体中段背鳞23行的一些亚洲蝮属蛇类进行了比较研究。结果表明，中国不同地区的“中介蝮”彼此形态差异显著，具分类鉴别意义，达到亚种划分标准，进而将这些蝮蛇与西伯利亚蝮不同亚种间的形态特征和模式产地信息进行了比对，发现这些蝮蛇符合西伯利亚蝮（G. halys）种下几个亚种的鉴定标准：主产区位于东北及内蒙古东部者应为G. h. halys（西伯利亚蝮指名亚种）；主产区位于华北地区者应为G. h. stejnegeri；主产区位于西北地区者应为G. h. cognatus。分子研究结果揭示，我国西伯利亚蝮不同亚种在系统发育树中不构成单系群，且彼此间线粒体基因遗传距离达到或高出该复合种中其他已知独立种间的距离。故建议将G. h. stejnegeri和G. h. cognatus从西伯利亚蝮种下独立分出，称华北蝮（G. stejnegeri）和阿拉善蝮（G. cognatus）。单倍型网络分析亦建议将G. h. caraganus提升为种级。本研究亦证实了蛇岛蝮（G. shedaoensis）在辽东半岛陆地山区的分布，从而恢复蛇岛蝮千山亚种（G. sh. qianshanensis）的有效性，主张在下一步工作中对其进行新模指订和再描述工作。在上述结果基础上，对我国境内上述几种蝮蛇的地理分布资料进行了系统地整理和补充。 |
| 英文摘要: |
| Over the past decades, the snakes of the genus Gloydius with 23 rows mid-back scales (except for Gloydius saxatilis, G. shedaoensis and G. lijianlii) have been identified as G. intermedius by most Chinese herpetologists consistently. However, different populations of so called “G. intermedius” in the north of China exhibit highly variable in morphological characters and behavioral traits (Fig. 2, Fig. 3 and Fig. 4). Therefore, it is necessary to investigate the systematic relationships between different populations of “G. intermedius”. In this study, we conducted a comparative study on different populations of “G. intermedius” in the north of China (Table 1 and Table 2) by combining several approaches such as field exploration (Fig. 1), morphological comparison and molecular phylogenetics. The results indicated that there are significant morphological difference between different populations of “G. intermedius” from the north of China (Table 3), which indeed belongs to three subspecies of G. halys, i.e. G. h. halys, G. h. cognatus and G. h. stejnegeri, respectively (morphological comparison in Table 4 and type locality comparison in Table 5). The mean genetic divergence (uncorrected p-distance) among these three subspecies of G. halys is higher than those among the recognized congeneric species, suggesting that G. h. cognatus and G. h. stejnegeri should be elevated as species status (Fig. 5 and Fig. 6). Accordingly, “G. intermedius” from the north of China should be regarded as three distinct species, i.e. “Siberian Pitviper (G. h. halys)”, “North China Pitviper” (G. stejnegeri) and “Alashan Pitviper” (G. cognatus), respectively. The haplotype network also suggested that G. h. caraganus should be elevated as species status (G. caraganus, Fig. 6). In addition, this study reveals that G. shedaoensis, which was considered as an insular endemic species, also occur in Liaodong Peninsular Mountains, thus we suggest to recover the validity of G. sh. qianshanensis Li, 1999. Finally, we provided a thorough review and supplement of the taxonomy, distribution and biology of the Gloydius halys-G. intermedius complex in China. |
| 附件 |
| 查看全文 查看/发表评论 下载PDF阅读器 |
|
|
|
