What makes a fang? Phylogenetic and ecological controls on tooth evolution in rear-fanged snakes

Abstract Background Fangs are a putative key innovation that revolutionized prey capture and feeding in snakes, and – along with their associated venom phenotypes – have made snakes perhaps the most medically-significant vertebrate animals. Three snake clades are known for their forward-positioned f...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Erin P. Westeen, Andrew M. Durso, Michael C. Grundler, Daniel L. Rabosky, Alison R. Davis Rabosky
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2020-07-01
Series:BMC Evolutionary Biology
Subjects:
Online Access:http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12862-020-01645-0
id doaj-f8632fb3395a43d582c6b83929990134
record_format Article
spelling doaj-f8632fb3395a43d582c6b839299901342021-09-02T13:12:25ZengBMCBMC Evolutionary Biology1471-21482020-07-0120111510.1186/s12862-020-01645-0What makes a fang? Phylogenetic and ecological controls on tooth evolution in rear-fanged snakesErin P. Westeen0Andrew M. Durso1Michael C. Grundler2Daniel L. Rabosky3Alison R. Davis Rabosky4Department of Environmental Science, Policy, and Management & Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, University of CaliforniaDepartment of Biological Sciences, Florida Gulf Coast UniversityDepartment of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology & Museum of Zoology, University of MichiganDepartment of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology & Museum of Zoology, University of MichiganDepartment of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology & Museum of Zoology, University of MichiganAbstract Background Fangs are a putative key innovation that revolutionized prey capture and feeding in snakes, and – along with their associated venom phenotypes – have made snakes perhaps the most medically-significant vertebrate animals. Three snake clades are known for their forward-positioned fangs, and these clades (Elapidae, Viperidae, and Atractaspidinae) contain the majority of snakes that are traditionally considered venomous. However, many other snakes are “rear-fanged”: they possess potentially venom-delivering teeth situated at the rear end of the upper jaw. Quantification of fang phenotypes – and especially those of rear-fanged species – has proved challenging or impossible owing to the small size and relative rarity of many such snakes. Consequently, it has been difficult to understand the evolutionary history of both venom and prey-capture strategies across extant snakes. We quantified variation in the dentition of 145 colubriform (“advanced”) snake species using microCT scanning and compared dental characters with ecological data on species’ diet and prey capture method(s) to understand broader patterns in snake fang evolution. Results Dental traits such as maxilla length, tooth number, and fang size show strong phylogenetic signal across Colubriformes. We find extreme heterogeneity and evolutionary lability in the rear-fanged phenotype in colubrid (colubrine, dipsadine, and natricine lineages) and lamprophiid snakes, in contrast to relative uniformity in the front fanged phenotypes of other groups (vipers and, to a lesser extent, elapids). Fang size and position are correlated with venom-use in vipers, elapids, and colubrid snakes, with the latter group shifting fangs anteriorly by shortening the entire maxillary bone. We find that maxilla length and tooth number may also be correlated with the evolution of dietary specialization. Finally, an ancestral state reconstruction suggests that fang loss is a recurring phenomenon in colubrid snakes, likely accompanied by shifts in diet and prey capture mode. Conclusions Our study provides a framework for quantifying the complex morphologies associated with venom use in snakes. Our results suggest that fang phenotypes, and particularly the rear-fanged phenotype, in snakes are both diverse and labile, facilitating a wide range of ecological strategies and contributing to spectacular radiations of these organisms in tropical and subtropical biomes worldwide.http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12862-020-01645-0MacroevolutionMorphologyComputed tomographyEvolutionary ecologyDietary ecologyDentition
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Erin P. Westeen
Andrew M. Durso
Michael C. Grundler
Daniel L. Rabosky
Alison R. Davis Rabosky
spellingShingle Erin P. Westeen
Andrew M. Durso
Michael C. Grundler
Daniel L. Rabosky
Alison R. Davis Rabosky
What makes a fang? Phylogenetic and ecological controls on tooth evolution in rear-fanged snakes
BMC Evolutionary Biology
Macroevolution
Morphology
Computed tomography
Evolutionary ecology
Dietary ecology
Dentition
author_facet Erin P. Westeen
Andrew M. Durso
Michael C. Grundler
Daniel L. Rabosky
Alison R. Davis Rabosky
author_sort Erin P. Westeen
title What makes a fang? Phylogenetic and ecological controls on tooth evolution in rear-fanged snakes
title_short What makes a fang? Phylogenetic and ecological controls on tooth evolution in rear-fanged snakes
title_full What makes a fang? Phylogenetic and ecological controls on tooth evolution in rear-fanged snakes
title_fullStr What makes a fang? Phylogenetic and ecological controls on tooth evolution in rear-fanged snakes
title_full_unstemmed What makes a fang? Phylogenetic and ecological controls on tooth evolution in rear-fanged snakes
title_sort what makes a fang? phylogenetic and ecological controls on tooth evolution in rear-fanged snakes
publisher BMC
series BMC Evolutionary Biology
issn 1471-2148
publishDate 2020-07-01
description Abstract Background Fangs are a putative key innovation that revolutionized prey capture and feeding in snakes, and – along with their associated venom phenotypes – have made snakes perhaps the most medically-significant vertebrate animals. Three snake clades are known for their forward-positioned fangs, and these clades (Elapidae, Viperidae, and Atractaspidinae) contain the majority of snakes that are traditionally considered venomous. However, many other snakes are “rear-fanged”: they possess potentially venom-delivering teeth situated at the rear end of the upper jaw. Quantification of fang phenotypes – and especially those of rear-fanged species – has proved challenging or impossible owing to the small size and relative rarity of many such snakes. Consequently, it has been difficult to understand the evolutionary history of both venom and prey-capture strategies across extant snakes. We quantified variation in the dentition of 145 colubriform (“advanced”) snake species using microCT scanning and compared dental characters with ecological data on species’ diet and prey capture method(s) to understand broader patterns in snake fang evolution. Results Dental traits such as maxilla length, tooth number, and fang size show strong phylogenetic signal across Colubriformes. We find extreme heterogeneity and evolutionary lability in the rear-fanged phenotype in colubrid (colubrine, dipsadine, and natricine lineages) and lamprophiid snakes, in contrast to relative uniformity in the front fanged phenotypes of other groups (vipers and, to a lesser extent, elapids). Fang size and position are correlated with venom-use in vipers, elapids, and colubrid snakes, with the latter group shifting fangs anteriorly by shortening the entire maxillary bone. We find that maxilla length and tooth number may also be correlated with the evolution of dietary specialization. Finally, an ancestral state reconstruction suggests that fang loss is a recurring phenomenon in colubrid snakes, likely accompanied by shifts in diet and prey capture mode. Conclusions Our study provides a framework for quantifying the complex morphologies associated with venom use in snakes. Our results suggest that fang phenotypes, and particularly the rear-fanged phenotype, in snakes are both diverse and labile, facilitating a wide range of ecological strategies and contributing to spectacular radiations of these organisms in tropical and subtropical biomes worldwide.
topic Macroevolution
Morphology
Computed tomography
Evolutionary ecology
Dietary ecology
Dentition
url http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12862-020-01645-0
work_keys_str_mv AT erinpwesteen whatmakesafangphylogeneticandecologicalcontrolsontoothevolutioninrearfangedsnakes
AT andrewmdurso whatmakesafangphylogeneticandecologicalcontrolsontoothevolutioninrearfangedsnakes
AT michaelcgrundler whatmakesafangphylogeneticandecologicalcontrolsontoothevolutioninrearfangedsnakes
AT daniellrabosky whatmakesafangphylogeneticandecologicalcontrolsontoothevolutioninrearfangedsnakes
AT alisonrdavisrabosky whatmakesafangphylogeneticandecologicalcontrolsontoothevolutioninrearfangedsnakes
_version_ 1721175166948474880