Dipsas baliomelas

Rediscovering the Hidden Gems of South America's Forests

An Excellent Science with Problematic Naming

Michael B. Harvey's groundbreaking study on Dipsas snakes in northern South America is a triumph of field biology and taxonomic clarity. In this richly detailed work, Harvey introduces several new and poorly known species of Dipsas, a genus of non-venomous, snail-eating snakes that thrive in the humid forests of the region. These serpents, often overlooked due to their cryptic habits and remote habitats, are brought vividly into focus through meticulous morphological analysis and precise locality data.

What makes this study exceptional is its blend of scientific rigor and ecological storytelling. Harvey doesn't just describe species—he paints a picture of their world, from the leaf litter they slither through to the snails they delicately extract from shells. His work underscores the urgent need for continued biodiversity surveys in underexplored regions, where even well-known genera like Dipsas still hold secrets waiting to be uncovered.

This paper is a reminder that the natural world is far richer than we often imagine—and that careful observation can still yield thrilling discoveries.

Dipsas baliomelas — Etymology and Linguistic Critique

Etymology Note (as published): "Etymology. The specific epithet baliomelas is a masculine noun in apposition derived from the Greek adjective balios meaning spotted and noun Melon meaning cheek. The name refers to the distinctive brown, black, and white pattern of the temporal region and labials of this species."

This species, Dipsas baliomelas, was formally described with the epithet baliomelas, declared as a noun in apposition. While technically permissible under the ICZN Code, this choice raises several linguistic and taxonomic concerns.

Linguistic and Semantic Issues

1. Unorthodox Derivation: The suffix –melas is said to be derived from the Greek melon (from μέτωπον, metōpon, meaning "forehead" or μάγουλον, magoulon, meaning "cheek") is not linguistically connected to melas. The construction baliomelas thus represents a step to the side, lacking etymological coherence.

2. Conflict with Established Vocabulary: The term melas (μέλας) is a well-established Greek adjective meaning "black." Creating a neologism that coincides with a common, unrelated word introduces semantic confusion. This violates a core principle of scientific naming: clarity and distinctiveness.

3. Adjective Form Declared as Noun: The epithet baliomelas is morphologically formed like a Latin adjective, yet the author declares it as a noun in apposition. While this is allowed under ICZN rules, it is highly unorthodox and contributes to ambiguity.

4. Reference to Nonexistent Anatomy: The name is said to refer to a "cheek" region in the snake. However, anatomically speaking, snakes do not possess cheeks in the mammalian sense. Their lateral head structure lacks the muscular and glandular complexity required to define a cheek. The term is not used in herpetological anatomy, and applying it metaphorically to include the temporal region and labials is factually incorrect.

Anatomical Clarification: What Is a Cheek?

In vertebrate anatomy, the cheek refers to the lateral wall of the oral cavity, extending from the zygomatic arch to the mandible, and includes:

• Skin and subcutaneous tissue

• Facial muscles (especially the buccinator)

• Fat pads (e.g., buccal fat pad)

• Blood vessels and nerves (facial and trigeminal branches)

• Buccal mucosa

Functionally, cheeks:

• Keep food between teeth during chewing

• Support facial expressions

• House salivary glands and ducts (e.g., parotid duct)

This structure is present in mammals, and in modified forms in lizards and birds—especially in rodents, ruminants, carnivores, and primates. Snakes lack cheeks entirely, both anatomically and functionally. Their dorsoventrally flattened heads and absence of zygomatic arches make the concept inapplicable.

Summary Judgment

The epithet baliomelas is a barbarism:

• It misderives a suffix from an unrelated stem

• It creates a neologism that conflicts with an established word (μέλας)

• It forms an adjective but declares it a noun in apposition

• It refers to an anatomical structure that does not exist in snakes

This fourfold confusion undermines the clarity and rigor that the Linnaean binomial system and the ICZN Code were designed to uphold. Yet, under current ICZN practice, such linguistic and semantic liberties are tolerated, even when they result in taxonomic opacity.

It stands as a testament to the decline of linguistic discipline in modern taxonomy—a practice that would have been deemed unacceptable by classical scholars and early taxonomists.

Reference:

Harvey, M.B. (2008). New and Poorly Known Dipsas (Serpentes: Colubridae) from Northern South America. Herpetological Monographs, 22(1), 106–132. https://doi.org/10.1655/07-042.1