zoocreation


Sea Serpents
After the flood



A Creationist Look at the Palaeophiidae
and Other Extinct Post-Flood Marine Snakes



Chad Arment (2024)



There was a time, after the Flood, when large serpents swam the oceans. The now-extinct Palaeophiidae were not, of course, as monstrous or as large as sea serpents portrayed in various science-fiction/fantasy movies over the years. But certain palaeophiids are included among the largest snakes known to have existed, along with terrestrial giants like the boid Titanoboa and the madtsoiid Gigantophis. Palaeophiids inhabited primarily coastal (freshwater, estuarine, and marine), but sometimes open pelagic, environments. The Palaeophiidae includes Palaeophis (with over a dozen described species from the Cretaceous to the Eocene), Pterosphenus (five recognized species from Eocene deposits), and Archaeophis (two species in the Eocene). Of these three genera, only Archaeophis is known with cranial material—the other genera are only known from vertebrae and pieces of the vertebral column.


Within the evolutionary model, the origins of the Palaeophiidae are murky, with some suggesting that they are related to the Boidae (Calvert et al. 2022), or to certain Cretaceous marine snakes (Smith and Georgalis 2022), while others point to a relationship with the extant aquatic snakes (file snakes, wart snakes, and elephant trunk snakes) in the Acrochordidae (Snetkov 2011). Within the creation model, the Palaeophiidae may be related to certain other snakes, but if so, their development lies in the many centuries making up the pre-Flood world, so there is very little evidence to scrutinize outside of the few Flood fossils that survive.



Palaeophis



Palaeophis fossils have been found in Europe (Zvonok and Snetkov 2012; Georgalis et al. 2020), Africa (Houssaye et al. 2013; Folie et al. 2021; Georgalis et al. 2021), Central Asia (Averianov 1997; Snetkov 2011), India (Rage et al. 2008), and the East Coast and Gulf Coast of the United States (Blake 1941; Holman 1982; Parmley and Case 1988). In most cases, Palaeophis fossils are Eocene, but vertebrae from the Cretaceous and Paleocene in Morocco are known (Rage and Wouters 1979). Vertebrae have also been discovered in the Paleocene/Eocene Stollekint Clay on the Isle of Mors, northern Denmark (Kristensen et al. 2012), and in the Paleocene Black Mingo faunal assemblage of South Carolina (Erickson 1998). A probable, but unconfirmed, palaeophiid centrum of a trunk vertebra is known from the Cretaceous of Sudan (Rage and Werner 1999), while Folie et al. (2021) note that there is a passing mention of Palaeophis occurring in Cretaceous Niger. Biogeographically, one species, Palaeophis africanus, had been suggested to have been trans-Atlantic (Parmley and DeVore 2005), but this has since been rejected due to poor source material (Georgalis et al. 2021).


The three largest species of Palaeophis are P. colossaeus, P. maghrebianus, and P. africanus, which may suggest an African clade (Folie et al. 2021). (Palaeophis maghrebianus vertebrae are very commonly sold to fossil enthusiasts from the phosphate deposits of Morocco.) Palaeophis colossaeus may have reached up to nine meters. A small species, Palaeophis casei, from Gulf Coast Eocene deposits is estimated to have reached a bit over four feet (1.3 meters) in length (Parmley and Reed 2003). Palaeophis fossils are usually found in coastal environment deposits. Species are often discussed in terms of being either ‘primitive,’ with vertebrae only somewhat modified for aquatic life, or ‘advanced,’ with vertebrae showing specialized adaptations for aquatic life (Houssaye et al. 2013). Folie et al. (2021) noted that intracolumnar variation in palaeophiids is not well studied, which could potentially contribute to excess species descriptions. They also noted that anterior vertebrae may be laterally compressed (an ‘advanced’ trait) in otherwise ‘primitive’ grade species, so comparisons between species should be carefully made on vertebrae from the same region. There is some evidence that Palaeophis may be paraphyletic (Snetkov 2011).



Pterosphenus



Pterosphenus fossils are considered to be more adapted (‘derived’) to a marine lifestyle, and are found in both coastal environment and open ocean deposits (Hutchison 1985). Pterosphenus fossils are found in Africa (McCartney and Seiffert 2015; McCartney et al. 2018), Central and Southeast Asia (Head et al. 2005; Averianov 2023), India (Rage et al. 2003; Rage et al. 2008), South America (Hoffstetter 1958), and the East Coast and Gulf Coast of North America (Westgate and Ward 1981; Hutchison 1985). Snetkov (2011) noted that, cladistically, Pterosphenus appears to be derived from one of the (paraphyletic) Palaeophis lineages. Pterosphenus shows up early in the Eocene, diversifies, and disappears prior to the Oligocene. Calvert et al. (2022) suggested that Pterosphenus schucherti from North America was in the 2.5 to 4.8 meter range, having used boids as a comparative model. (Using pythonids, the estimates were much longer, but the authors had low confidence in that model.)



Palaeophis africanus

(CC BY 4.0 Georgalis et al. 2021)



Pterosphenus schucherti

(CC BY 4.0 Calvert et al. 2022)



Archaeophis



The Eocene Archaeophis proavus was discovered in the Bolca Fossil-Lagerstätte near Verona, Italy. This is a volcanic depositional complex, with some deposits producing terrestrial organisms, and others producing fossils from a shallow marine environment (Seghetti et al. 2022). Numerous turtles and crocodilians have been discovered in the Bolca deposits, along with a few snakes. Archaeophis proavus was about three feet in length, had about 565 vertebrae, and had distinct morphological adaptations to an aquatic lifestyle (Janensch 1906; Seghetti et al. 2022). A second species from Turkmenistan, Archaeophis turkmenicus, may actually belong to a separate, as yet undescribed genus (Rage et al. 2003). Snetkov (2011) showed some cladistic support for Archaeophis being derived from Palaeophis, though separately from Pterosphenus. Future investigation of the skulls of both Archaeophis species may help clarify their relationship to the Palaeophiidae (Smith and Georgalis 2022), and their current inclusion might be best considered tentative.



Archaeophis proavus

(CC BY-SA 4.0 Raimond Spekking)



Nigerophiidae



This family of marine serpents (also extinct) can often be found in the same deposits as the Palaeophiidae. Head et al. (2022) notes, “. . . the interrelationships of palaeophiids and nigerophiids are poorly constrained. Palaeophiids possess the complete suit of vertebral apomorphies of Alethinophidia . . ., whereas nigerophiids possess all but prezygapophyseal accessory processes.” Some genera (Woutersophis, Indophis) are tentatively included in the Nigerophiidae, though reminiscent of both families, until a more exhaustive review, or better specimens, become available (Rage and Werner 1999). Generally, nigerophiids are smaller than palaeophiids, with the largest genera being Amananulam and “Nessovophis” at about 2 meters in length each (McCartney et al. 2018).


The Nigerophiidae first appear in (Cretaceous) Flood deposits. Nubianophis is found in Cretaceous Sudan (Rage and Werner 1999), Indophis in Cretaceous India (Rage and Werner 1999; Rage et al. 2004), and the small (>1 meter long) Kelyophis in Cretaceous Madagascar (Laduke et al. 2010). A possible, undetermined nigerophiid is known from Cretaceous Morocco (Klein et al. 2017). Nigerophis is known from Paleocene Niger (Rage and Werner 1999), Amananulam from Paleocene Mali (McCartney et al. 2018), Woutersophis from Eocene Belgium (Rage and Werner 1999), and “Nessovophis” zhylga from Eocene Kazakhstan (Averianov 1997; Rage et al. 2003).



Nigerophis mirus

(CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 Houssaye et al. 2018)



Indophis sahnii

(CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 Houssaye et al. 2018)



Tuscahomaophis



Tuscahomaophis leggetti is the sole member of its genus, and not closely related to any of the other groups here. It was found in the Paleocene Tuscahoma Formation in Mississippi (Holman 1992), specifically the T4 sand unit (Beard and Dawson 2009). It resembles Palaeophis in a number of characters, but also lacks pterapophyses as do the Nigerophiidae (Holman 1992). Averianov (1997) noted that Tuscahomaophis appears to occupy an intermediate position between the Palaeophiidae and the Nigerophiidae. Oddly, Tuscahomophis has a specific foramen only found in the Madtsoiidae (another extinct group of terrestrial to semi-aquatic snakes found in Cretaceous to Oligocene deposits), though this was probably ‘independently derived’ (Holman 1992). It was found in an estuarine or riverine deposit along with numerous fossil fish, as well as the fossil snakes Palaeophis casei, P. littoralis, and P. virginianus, and has morphological adaptations suggesting it was aquatic in nature.



Russellophiidae



Not much has been published on these marine snakes. Krebsophis is known from Cretaceous Sudan (Rage and Werner 1999). Indeterminate Russellophiidae are known from Paleocene Brazil (Onary et al. 2017) and Eocene Egypt (McCartney and Seiffert 2015). Russellophis is known from Eocene France, England, and India (Holman et al. 2006; Rage et al. 2008; Houssaye et al. 2019).



Anomalophiidae



Anomalophis was discovered in the same Eocene Italian deposit as Archaeophis (Seghetti et al. 2022). Auffenberg (1959) noted the lateral compression of the vertebrae, similar to a modern sea snake, demonstrating an adaptation to an aquatic environment.



Anomalophis bolcensis

(CC BY-SA 4.0 Ghedoghedo)



Acrochordidae



Acrochordus is an extant genus of aquatic snakes, popularly known as file snakes, wart snakes, and elephant trunk snakes. Besides the three living species, a Miocene fossil species, Acrochordus dehmi, is known from Pakistan, India, and Nepal (Rage et al. 2001; Head 2005). Additional Acrochordus material is known from Miocene Thailand (Sanders et al. 2010). Acrochordus dehmi is distinguishable from, but ‘reminiscent to,’ the living A. javanicus (Rage et al. 2001).


The three living species include A. granulatus, ranging widely from India to the Solomon Islands, including coastal, marine, and freshwater habitats; A. javanicus, in southeast Asia freshwater habitats; and A. arafurae in northern Australia and southern New Guinea freshwater habitats (Sanders et al. 2010). Molecular research places A. arafurae and A. granulatus as sister species, with A. javanicus a sister to that group (Sanders et al. 2010). A. granulatus, the little file snake, was once classified in a separate genus, Chersydrus, but that has been synonymized.


The Acrochordidae has been connected to the palaeophiids, but other studies have suggested that that speculation may be based on homoplasies arising from convergent aquatic behavior (Sanders et al. 2010).





Marine File Snake, Acrochordus granulatus



(CC BY-NC 4.0) Jeremy P. (Herpavida)


Javan File Snake, Acrochordus javanicus



(CC BY-NC 4.0) Muhammad Iqbal


Arafura File Snake, Acrochordus arafurae



(CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) Zig Madycki


From the Flood to the Present Day



The pre-Flood world had several lineages of marine snakes, which we know from fossils preserved mostly in the uppermost layers of Flood deposits (the Cretaceous layers). The Palaeophiidae (represented by Palaeophis), the Nigerophiidae, and the Russellophiidae are all found in Flood rocks and in post-Flood deposits. Another group of snakes is known from Cretaceous rocks only: the Simoliophiidae (formerly Pachyophiidae) are a family of marine snakes, several genera of which have well-formed hind limbs. So far, they are not known to have survived the Flood, but it wouldn’t be surprising if members of this family are found as Paleogene fossils in the future. Determining how many actual baraminic lineages are involved with these pre-Flood marine snakes will be speculative. We know that multi-familial baraminic lineages are possible (probably moreso for aquatic lineages that survived the Flood outside the Ark), and we know that there were a couple thousand years (give or take) for those lineages to diversify prior to the Flood. All we see in Flood fossils are the branch tips of those phylogenetic trees; the original morphologies may have vanished without a trace long before the Flood.


Post-Flood fossils can tell us something about these snakes’ environment (especially when examined along with other fossil species in the same formation), but without cranial material, speculation about their specific biology is limited by what can be determined by looking at vertebrae. Biogeographically, they can inform on the immediate post-Flood world, especially where coastal or shallow sea environments may have still been in place in the immediate aftermath of the Flood. We know that large portions of northern Africa, the Middle East, northern South America, and the southeastern U.S. were still underwater in the Paleocene-Eocene. Many early post-Flood seas have since disappeared, but fossils of marine organisms mark their former existence.


Evolutionary discussions of survival strategies for the ‘Cretaceous-Paleogene mass extinction’ (Klein et al. 202) may actually offer insight into ‘outside the Ark’ survival strategies for the biblical Flood model. Freshwater refugium may have offered shelter against oceanic temperature changes. As large snakes typically only feed infrequently, limited prey availability in the immediate aftermath of the Flood may not have been as detrimental to some lineages.


Hecht et al. (1974) suggested that cooling surface temperatures in the oceans during the Oligocene contributed to the demise of the Palaeophiidae (and presumably the other Eocene groups), but that rebounding temperatures in the Pacific allowed the terrestrial ancestors of modern sea snakes and sea krait (Elapidae: Hydrophiinae and Laticaudinae) to diversify into and adapt to a marine environment. Within a creation model, massive shifts in climatic and oceanic temperatures after the Flood would certainly have both created barriers and opened new pathways for organisms as they spread across the planet and diversified into new morphotypes. Some marine lineages like the Palaeophiidae survived long enough to diversify into specialized forms, but climatic barriers eventually led to extinction. Open niches would then have created opportunity for colonization and innovation within other lineages like the modern sea snakes.


Modern sea snakes are biogeographically limited by ocean temperature (especially surface temperature), freshwater availability (through rainfall or access to rivers), prevailing currents, and storm pathways (Hecht et al. 1974; Lillywhite et al. 2018). The development of the elapid sea snakes may have begun as early as the Oligocene, but showed extensive radiation in the Miocene, with rapid turnover until the modern genera established themselves, probably in the Pliocene (Scanlon et al. 2003).



A Post-Flood View of Various Marine Snakes
(Excluding modern sea snakes and sea krait)
Questionable connections noted are only speculative.



references



Auffenberg, W. 1959. Anomalophis bolcensis (Massalongo), a new genus of fossil snake from the Italian Eocene. Breviora (114): 1-16.


Averianov, A. O. 1997. Paleogene sea snakes from the eastern part of Tethys. Russian Journal of Herpetology 4(2): 128-142.


Averianov, A. O. 2023. Pterosphenus muruntau—valid species of sea snakes (Squamata: Palaeophiidae) from the middle Eocene of Uzbekistan. Zoosystematica Rossica 32(1): 85-92.


Beard, K. C., and M. R. Dawson. 2009. Early Wasatchian mammals of the Red Hot Local Fauna, uppermost Tuscahoma Formation, Lauderdale County, Mississippi. Annals of Carnegie Museum 78(3): 193-243.


Blake, S. F. 1941. Note on a vertebra of Palaeophis from the Eocene of Maryland. Journal of the Washington Academy of Sciences 31(12): 501-3.


Calvert, C. J., A. J. Mead, and D. Parmley. 2022. Size estimates of the extinct marine snake Pterosphenus schucherti from Eocene-aged sediments of central Georgia. Georgia Journal of Science 80(2), article 1.


Erickson, B. R. 1998. A palaeophid snake from the late Paleocene of South Carolina. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society N.S. 88(4): 215-220.


Folie, A., et al. 2021. Presence of the large aquatic snake Palaeophis africanus in the middle Eocene marine margin of the Congo Basin, Cabinda, Angola. Geobios (66-67): 45-54.


Georgalis, G. L., L. Del Favero, and M. Delfino. 2020. Italy’s largest snake: Redescription of Palaeophis oweni from the Eocene of Monte Duello, near Verona. Acta Palaeontologica Polonica 65(3): 523-533.


Georgalis, G. L., et al. 2021. An assemblage of giant aquatic snakes (Serpentes, Palaeophiidae) from the Eocene of Togo. Swiss Journal of Palaeontology 140: 1-18.


Head, J. J. 2005. Snakes of the Siwalik Group (Miocene of Pakistan): Systematics and relationship to environmental change. Palaeontologia Electronica 8(1): 1-33.


Head, J. J., A. F. C. Howard, and J. Müller. 2022. The first 80 million years of snake evolution. in: Gower, D. J., and H. Zaher, eds. The Origin and Early Evolutionary History of Snakes, pp. 26-54. Systematics Association Special Volume 90. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.


Head, J. J., et al. 2005. First report of snakes (Serpentes) from the late middle Eocene Pondaung Formation, Myanmar. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology 25(1): 246-250.


Hecht, M. K., C. Kropach, and B. M. Hecht. 1974. Distribution of the yellow-bellied sea snake, Pelamis platurus, and its significance in relation to the fossil record. Herpetologica 30: 387-396.


Hoffstetter, R. 1958. Un serpent marin du genre Pterosphenus (Part sheppardi nov. sp.) dans l’Eocene superior de l’Equateur (Amerique du Sud). Bulletin de la Société Géologique de France S6-VIII (1): 45-50.


Holman, J. A. 1982. Palaeophis casei, new species, a tiny palaeophid snake from the early Eocene of Mississippi. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology 2(2): 163-166.


Holman, J. A. 1992. A puzzling new snake (Reptilia: Serpentes) from the late Palaeocene of Mississippi. Annals of Carnegie Museum 61(3): 197-205.


Holman, J. A., D. L. Harrison, and D. J. Ward. 2006. Late Eocene snakes from the Headon Hill Formation, southern England. Cainozoic Research 5(1-2): 51-62.


Houssaye, A., et al. 2013. New highlights about the enigmatic marine snake Palaeophis maghrebianus (Palaeophiidae; Palaeophiinae) from the Ypresian (Lower Eocene) phosphates of Morocco. Palaeontology 56(3): 647-661.


Houssaye, A., et al. 2019. Adaptation of the vertebral inner structure to an aquatic life in snakes: Pachyophiid peculiarities in comparison to extant and extinct forms. Comptes Rendus Palevol 18: 783-799.


Hutchison, J. H. 1985. Pterosphenus cf. P. schucherti Lucas (Squamata, Palaeophidae) from the late Eocene of peninsular Florida. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology 5(1): 20-23.


Janensch, W. 1906. Über Archaeophis proavus Mass., eine schlange aus dem Eocän des Monte Bolca. Beiträge zur Paläontologie und Geologie Oestreich-Ungarns und des Orients 19: 1-33. (Transl. Scanlon, J. D. 2000. https://naturalhistory.si.edu/sites/default/files/media/translated_ publications/Janensch_06.pdf)


Klein, C. G., et al. 2017. A new basal snake from the mid-Cretaceous of Morocco. Cretaceous Research 72: 134-141.


Klein, C. G., et al. 2021. Evolution and dispersal of snakes across the Cretaceous-Paleogene mass extinction. Nature Communications 12(5335): 1-9.


Kristensen, H. V., et al. 2012. Earliest record of the fossil snake Palaeophis from the Paleocene/Eocene boundary in Denmark. Bulletin Soc. géol. France 183(6): 621-625.


Laduke, T. C., et al. 2010. A late Cretaceous (Maastrichtian) snake assemblage from the Maevarano Formation, Mahajanga Basin, Madagascar. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology 30(1): 109-138.


Lillywhite, H. B., et al. 2018. Why are there no sea snakes in the Atlantic? BioScience 68(1): 15-24.


McCartney, J. A., and E. R. Seiffert. 2015. A late Eocene snake fauna from the Fayum Depression, Egypt. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology e1029580.


McCartney, J. A., et al. 2018. Large palaeophiid and nigerophiid snakes from Paleogene Trans-Saharan Seaway deposits of Mali. Acta Palaeontologica Polonica 63(2): 207-220.


Onary, S. Y., T. S. Fachini, and A. S. Hsiou. 2017. The snake fossil record from Brazil. Journal of Herpetology 51(3): 365-74.


Parmley, D., and G. R. Case. 1988. Palaeopheid snakes from the Gulf Coastal region of North America. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology 8(3): 334-339.


Parmley, D., and M. DeVore. 2005. Palaeopheid snakes from the late Eocene Hardie Mine Local Fauna of central Georgia. Southeastern Naturalist 4(4): 703-722.


Parmley, D., and H. W. Reed. 2003. Size and age class estimates of North American Eocene Palaeopheid snakes. Georgia Journal of Science 61(4): 220-232.


Rage, J.-C. 2008. Fossil snakes from the Palaeocene of São José de Itaboraí, Brazil. Part III. Ungaliophiinae, booids incertae sedis, and Caenophidia. Summary, update, and discussion of the snake fauna from the locality. Palaeovertebrata 36(1-4): 37-73.


Rage, J.-C., and C. Werner. 1999. Mid-Cretaceous (Cenomanian) snakes from Wadi Abu Hashim, Sudan: The earliest snake assemblage. Palaeont. Afr. 35: 85-110.


Rage, J.-C., and G. Wouters. 1979. Decouverte du plus ancien Palaeopheide (Reptilia, Serpentes) dans le Maestrichtien du Maroc. Geobios 12(2): 293-296.


Rage, J.-C., G. V. R. Prasad, and S. Bajpai. 2004. Additional snakes from the uppermost Cretaceous (Maastrichtian) of India. Cretaceous Research 25: 425-434.


Rage, J.-C., S. S. Gupta, and G. V. R. Prasad. 2001. Amphibians and squamates from the Neogene Siwalik beds of Jammu and Kashmir, India. Paläontologische Zeitschrift 75(2): 197-205.


Rage, J.-C., et al. 2003. Early Eocene snakes from Kutch, western India, with a review of the Palaeophiidae. Geodiversitas 25(4): 695-716.


Rage, J.-C., et al. 2008. A diverse snake fauna from the early Eocene of Vastan Lignite Mine, Gujarat, India. Acta Palaeontologica Polonica 53(3): 391-403.


Sanders, K. L., et al. 2010. Phylogeny and divergence times of filesnakes (Acrochordus): Inferences from morphology, fossils and three molecular loci. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 56: 857-867.


Scanlon, J. D., M. S. Y. Lee, and M. Archer. 2003. Mid-Tertiary elapid snakes (Squamata, Colubroidea) from Riversleigh, northern Australia: early steps in a continent-wide adaptive radiation. Geobios 36: 573-601.


Seghetti, S. M., et al. 2022. A historical overview of the reptile fauna from the Eocene Bolca Fossil-Lagerstätte (Italy). Bolletino della Società Paleontologica Italiana 61(2): 119-143.


Smith, K. T., and G. L. Georgalis. 2022. The diversity and distribution of Palaeogene snakes: A review with comments on vertebral sufficiency. in: Gower, D. J., and H. Zaher, eds. The Origin and Early Evolutionary History of Snakes, pp. 55-84. Systematics Association Special Volume 90. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.


Snetkov, P. B. 2011. Vertebrae of the sea snake Palaeophis nessovi Averianov (Acrochordoidea, Palaeophiidae) from the Eocene of western Kazakhstan and phylogenetic analysis of the superfamily Acrochordoidea. Paleontological Journal 2011 45(3): 305-313.


Werner, C., and J.-C. Rage. 1994. Mid-Cretaceous snakes from Sudan. A preliminary report on an unexpectedly diverse snake fauna. C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris 319(2): 247-252.


Westgate, J. W., and J. F. Ward. 1981. The giant aquatic snake Pterosphenus schucherti (Palaeophidae) in Arkansas and Mississippi. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology 1(2): 161-164.


Zvonok, E. A., and P. B. Snetkov. 2012. New findings of snakes of the genus Palaeophis Owen, 1841 (Acrochordoidea: Palaeophiidae) from the middle Eocene of Crimea. Proceedings of the Zoological Institute RAS 316(4): 392-400.


Back to Articles

2021-2024





zoocreation