Two centuries of confusion: the status of Boaedon fuliginosus and Boaedon capensis, and the resurrection of Boaedon unicolor (Serpentes: Lamprophiidae: Lamprophiinae: Boaedontini)
Tiutenko A, Bates MF (2026)
Publication Language: English
Publication Type: Journal article, Original article
Publication year: 2026
Journal
Book Volume: 62
Journal Issue: 1
Abstract
As many as twelve new species of Boaedon have been described in the last decade, yet the status of one of the oldest and most commonly used names, Boaedon fuliginosus, remains unresolved. It has been the subject of much debate because the type specimen of Lycodon fuliginosus F. Boie, 1827 is lost, its type locality is unknown, and the brief description lacks sufficient detail to allow for an unambiguous determination of species identity. As it is not possible to determine with any certainty which species of snake it is, Lycodon fuliginosus is here declared a species inquirenda. In 1893, under the name Boodon fuliginosus, Boulenger synonymised all previous usages of the names L. unicolor, L. fuliginosus and B. unicolor, and described five specimens from various parts of Africa, probably referable to 2–3 different species of Boaedon (Boulenger 1893). This represents the first available usage of the name Boaedon fuliginosus. We designate as lectotype of Boaedon fuliginosus Boulenger, 1893, a specimen from Zemio in southern Central African Republic, to which locality we restrict this name. Lycodon unicolor F. Boie, 1827 that was described a few lines before L. fuliginosus, based on an earlier illustration and description by Russell, is now considered a junior synonym of either Lycodon aulicus or Lycodon capucinus. Schlegel later discussed and ‘described’ snakes from the vicinity of one of the former Danish forts on the coast of present-day Ghana in West Africa under the same name, ‘Lycodon unicolor’, but these snakes were obviously not conspecific with the Asian species L. unicolor. Designation of lectotype and paralectotypes of Lycodon unicolor by Hughes & Barry (1969), based on the material from Ghana reported on by Schlegel (1837), is invalid as the name is pre-occupied by the Asian species. Although there is no indication that Schlegel’s ‘description’ of the African L. unicolor constituted a new species description, the name Boaedon unicolor was subsequently used by Duméril et al. (1854), when describing five specimens from the Gold Coast (Ghana), which are clearly the same species of snake discussed by Schlegel. We propose that the latter be used as the first available name for the dorsally plain, dark-coloured, West African species currently identified as B. fuliginosus. As the syntypes are lost, and in order to objectively define the species, we designate and describe as neotype of Boaedon unicolor Duméril, Bibron & Duméril, 1854 a specimen from Accra, Ghana. In the same work, Duméril et al. also described Boaedon capensis from the Western and Eastern Cape provinces of South Africa. This species is currently considered to have an extensive range from the southernmost tip of Africa through east Africa to southern Somalia. As the syntypes are lost, and in order to objectively define the species, we designate and describe as neotype of Boaedon capensis Duméril, Bibron & Duméril, 1854 a specimen from near Herbertsdale in the Western Cape Province, South Africa.
Authors with CRIS profile
Involved external institutions
South Africa (ZA)How to cite
APA:
Tiutenko, A., & Bates, M.F. (2026). Two centuries of confusion: the status of Boaedon fuliginosus and Boaedon capensis, and the resurrection of Boaedon unicolor (Serpentes: Lamprophiidae: Lamprophiinae: Boaedontini). Salamandra, 62(1).
MLA:
Tiutenko, Arthur, and Michael F. Bates. "Two centuries of confusion: the status of Boaedon fuliginosus and Boaedon capensis, and the resurrection of Boaedon unicolor (Serpentes: Lamprophiidae: Lamprophiinae: Boaedontini)." Salamandra 62.1 (2026).
BibTeX: Download