Speaking to on the BBC World Service, Dr Longrich explained that the creature's tail wasn't paddle-shaped for swimming and it had no sign of fins; meanwhile its long trunk and short snout were typical of a burrower.
"It's pretty straight-up adapted for burrowing," he said.
When Dr Longrich first saw photos of the 19.5cm fossil, now christened Tetrapodophis amplectus, he was "really blown away" because he was expecting an ambiguous, in-between species.
Instead, he saw "a lot of very advanced snake features" including its hooked teeth, flexible jaw and spine - and even snake-like scales.
"And there's the gut contents - it's swallowed another vertebrate. It was preying on other animals, which is a snake feature.
"It was pretty unambiguously a snake. It's just got little arms and little legs."
Deadly embrace?
At 4mm and 7mm long respectively, those arms and legs are little indeed. But Dr Longrich was surprised to discover that they were far from being "vestigial" evolutionary leftovers, dangling uselessly."They're actually very highly specialised - they have very long, skinny fingers and toes, with little claws on the end. What we think [these animals] are doing is they've stopped using them for walking and they're using them for grasping their prey."
"It would sort of embrace or hug its prey with its forelimbs and hindlimbs. So it's the huggy snake," Dr Longrich said.
In order to try to pinpoint the huggy snake's place in history, the team constructed a family tree using known information about the physical and genetic make-up of living and ancient snakes, plus some related reptiles.
That analysis positioned T. amplectus as a branch - the earliest branch - on the the very same tree that gave rise to modern snakes.
Neglected no more
Remarkably, this significant specimen languished in a private collection for decades, before a museum in Solnhofen, Germany, acquired and exhibited it under the label "unknown fossil"."All of a sudden my jaw absolutely dropped, when I saw this little fossil like a piece of string," said Dr Martill, from the University of Portsmouth.
As he peered closer, he managed to spot the four tiny legs - and immediately asked the museum for permission to study the creature.
"It's quite a surprise, especially because it's so close to the crown group - basically, the current snakes," he said.
"It gives us a good idea of what the ancestral snake was like."
Dr Simoes suggested that alongside several other recent findings, this new fossil evidence had clinched the argument for snakes evolving on land.
"All [the latest findings] suggest that the ancestor of all snakes was a terrestrial animal... which lived partially underground." more:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-27502354
No comments:
Post a Comment