taxonID	type	description	language	source
038F87C0FFA6FFC8FF48FEEFFEE9FB78.taxon	discussion	Hydrophis fasciatus atriceps was mentioned by Smith (1926) as occurring in Australian waters based on one specimen from the Australian Museum (AMR 6715) and two specimens close to Australian waters (Aru Island and Kaiser Wilhelmsland, New Guinea). Cogger (1975) mentioned the same specimen as Smith, but had doubts about the locality and suggested the specimen was collected in Asian waters. Cogger also mentioned another juvenile specimen collected from Darwin (AMR 14022) that he regarded as a H. fasciatus fasciatus (Schneider, 1799). We have examined the same specimen and agree with Cogger’s (1975) identification using Smith’s (1926) characters to separate the two subspecies. The identification and distribution of the two taxa remains based on Smith´s monograph from 1926, where he separated them at a subspecies level and mentioned the typical form occurs to west of the Malay Peninsula and the other form is found east of it throughout the Malay Archipelago to Australia. Smith also indicated the dividing line is in the region of Singapore, despite including a specimen from China in the western subspecies and two specimens from India and Rangoon in the eastern form. The specimen from China included by Smith in the western form (H. f. fasciatus) is the type of Hydrophis lindsayi (Gray, 1831), which antedates the name H. f. atriceps by 22 years, indicating that if the taxa are separated into two geographically distinct forms and this specimen was incorrectly assigned by Smith (1926) to H. f. fasciatus, the right name for the eastern population would be H. fasciatus lindsayi and not H. fasciatus atriceps. Later, Cogger et al. (1983) raised the two taxa to species level, referring the Australian specimens to H. atriceps. Ward (1996) assigned five specimens to H. atriceps from the northern Australian continental shelf. All the specimens were collected by prawn trawling ships (Ward, 1996). It seems likely the characters used by Smith (1926) and all subsequent taxonomists to separate H. fasciatus and H. atriceps - scale rows around the neck and body together with ventrals - are not useful to assign correctly all specimens to species level in this complex. Whether the name for an Australian population of the H. fasciatus complex proves to be atriceps, fasciatus or lindsayi, we regard the species to be in Australian waters based on at least one specimen from the region of Darwin (AMR 14022) and the specimens mentioned by Ward (1996). We suggest using the name H. atriceps for the Australian population of this species until further taxonomic clarification.	en	Rasmussen, Arne Redsted, Sanders, Kate Laura, Guinea, Michael L., Amey, Andrew P. (2014): Sea snakes in Australian waters (Serpentes: subfamilies Hydrophiinae and Laticaudinae) - a review with an updated identification key. Zootaxa 3869 (4): 351-371, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3869.4.1
038F87C0FFA6FFC8FF48FAB7FB7EF9F4.taxon	discussion	Hydrophis belcheri was described by Gray (1849) who gave the type locality “ New Guinea ” with no further information. Smith (1926) re-described H. belcheri based on 21 specimens mainly from the Philippines, New Guinea and Fiji Islands. Most of Smith’s H. belcheri specimens have since been reassigned to the following taxa: Hydrophis coggeri, H. czeblukovi, H. pachycercos and H. pacificus (Cogger, 1975; Kharin, 1983, 1984 a; Rasmussen, Gravlund, van Nguyen, & Chanhome, 2007; Rasmussen & Smith, 1997). However, H. belcheri has been confirmed to occur from the Gulf of Thailand to the South China Sea (McCarthy & Warrell, 1991; Rasmussen, Elmberg, et al., 2011). There is a single record of H. belcheri from Australian waters identified by Kharin and Cheblukov (2007). The specimen is an adult female (# TINRO P 40) from the Arafura Sea, collected by V. P. Cheblukov, March 1970. Cheblukov’s specimen is in good accordance with the type of H. belcheri, confirming this species’ presence in Australian waters (Kharin & Cheblukov, 2007).	en	Rasmussen, Arne Redsted, Sanders, Kate Laura, Guinea, Michael L., Amey, Andrew P. (2014): Sea snakes in Australian waters (Serpentes: subfamilies Hydrophiinae and Laticaudinae) - a review with an updated identification key. Zootaxa 3869 (4): 351-371, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3869.4.1
038F87C0FFA6FFC8FF48F93BFC62F8B9.taxon	discussion	We have identified specimens of H. caerulescens from the northern part of Australia from the Australian Museum and the Queensland Museum. This species occurs in the Gulf of Carpentaria (Cogger, 1975; Cogger et al., 1983; David & Ineich, 1999; Kharin, 2004 a; Redfield, Holmes, & Holmes, 1978). We therefore regard H. caerulescens as confirmed from Australian waters.	en	Rasmussen, Arne Redsted, Sanders, Kate Laura, Guinea, Michael L., Amey, Andrew P. (2014): Sea snakes in Australian waters (Serpentes: subfamilies Hydrophiinae and Laticaudinae) - a review with an updated identification key. Zootaxa 3869 (4): 351-371, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3869.4.1
038F87C0FFA6FFC9FF48F8F7FBD4FE23.taxon	discussion	Boulenger described Hydrophis pacificus based on a single specimen from “ New Britain ” in Papua New Guinea. Wall (1909) later synonymised it with H. cyanocinctus. Smith (1926) disagreed with both Boulenger and Wall and synonymised the type specimen of H. pacificus with H. belcheri. In 1972, McDowell reviewed the Hydrophis group and included the H. pacificus type in H. elegans. Three years later Cogger (1975) resurrected the type of H. pacificus and referred 13 specimens from Northern Australia to this species (ARR examined 6 of the mentioned specimens: AMS 44983, 45092 and AMNH 142394 – 97). Today, most authorities recognise H. pacificus as occurring in the Australian region. However, both external and internal morphological characters (ARR observation) and molecular data show the Australian population of ‘ H. pacificus ’ belongs to the same species as the eastern Asian specimens of H. cyanocinctus (Sanders, Rasmussen, et al., 2013). However, as long as the taxonomic status of the Asian specimens of H. cyanocinctus remains unclear we suggest following Cogger (1975) and using the name H. pacificus until this complex has been investigated more thoroughly.	en	Rasmussen, Arne Redsted, Sanders, Kate Laura, Guinea, Michael L., Amey, Andrew P. (2014): Sea snakes in Australian waters (Serpentes: subfamilies Hydrophiinae and Laticaudinae) - a review with an updated identification key. Zootaxa 3869 (4): 351-371, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3869.4.1
038F87C0FFA7FFC9FF48FE02FDC3FBF3.taxon	discussion	Hydrophis inornatus was described by Gray (1849) who gave the type locality “ Indian Ocean ” with no further information. The validity of Hydrophis inornatus as a species is doubtful and only the type specimen was recognized by Rasmussen (1989) in this taxon until Kharin and Czeblukov (2005) referred to a specimen collected in Australia (Arafura Sea). However, we have not found any other evidence to support Kharin and Czeblukov’s (2005) claim that it occurs in Australia. We find little similarity between Kharin and Czeblukov’s H. inornatus specimen (TINRO R 11) and the type of H. inornatus (BMNH 1946.1.1.27). In particular, the maxillary bone shown in figure 2 of Kharin and Czeblukov (2005) is markedly different from that of the type of H. inornatus (see also Rasmussen, 1989; M. A. Smith, 1926); further the type does not have any spots on its body, unlike the specimen in Kharin and Czeblukov (2005). The specimen shown in Kharin and Czeblukov (2005) more closely resembles H. major in all the morphological characters mentioned, including the number of scale rows around neck and body, ventrals, subcaudals, number of teeth on maxillary bone and body form and colour pattern. Kharin and Czeblukov (2005) also included another specimen from Arafura Sea (NTMR 897) mentioned by Cogger (1975) as a possible H. inornatus; however, this specimen differs in ventral scale count to H. inornatus (Cogger, 1975). We therefore include this species neither in the checklist nor in the list of possible Australian sea snakes. Another recent paper published new records for H. inornatus from the Arabian Sea (Kharin & Dotsenko, 2012); however, based on photos included by the authors these specimens bear little resemblance to either the specimen from Australia or the type specimen, and instead clearly resemble Hydrophis viperinus (Schmidt, 1852) based on the diagnostic characters for this species (large ventral scales in the anterior part of the body) (Kharin & Dotsenko, 2012 Figures 2 and 3).	en	Rasmussen, Arne Redsted, Sanders, Kate Laura, Guinea, Michael L., Amey, Andrew P. (2014): Sea snakes in Australian waters (Serpentes: subfamilies Hydrophiinae and Laticaudinae) - a review with an updated identification key. Zootaxa 3869 (4): 351-371, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3869.4.1
038F87C0FFA7FFC9FF48FB32FE82FA9B.taxon	discussion	First described from the Chesterfield Reefs New Caledonia based on two specimens deposited at NHMN. We have found another specimen of H. laboutei in the collection of the Australian Museum also from Chesterfield Reefs. The type locality is not far from Australian waters so this species is likely to occur on reef complexes within eastern Australian waters (Cogger, 2007) and therefore we include it in the possible list.	en	Rasmussen, Arne Redsted, Sanders, Kate Laura, Guinea, Michael L., Amey, Andrew P. (2014): Sea snakes in Australian waters (Serpentes: subfamilies Hydrophiinae and Laticaudinae) - a review with an updated identification key. Zootaxa 3869 (4): 351-371, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3869.4.1
038F87C0FFA7FFC9FF48FAEAFBC2F910.taxon	discussion	This species is first mentioned by McDowell (1972) and later by Cogger (1975) and Minton (1975), from the Australian region. Kharin (1984 a) re-described the Australian specimens referred by McDowell to H. melanocephalus and created a new species, H. coggeri (Kharin, 1984 a). Hydrophis coggeri was accepted as a valid species occurring in the Australian and Southeast Asian regions to Fiji (Cogger, 1992; Heatwole & Cogger, 1994 a; Ineich, 2007; Sanders, Lee, et al., 2013; Wilson & Swan, 2010). The distribution of H. melanocephalus is recorded as the following: Japan, China, Taiwan, Vietnam and Sulawesi (David & Ineich, 1999; Rasmussen, Elmberg, et al., 2011; Sanders, Rasmussen, et al., 2013). We have not found any specimens or other evidence to confirm H. melanocephalus in Australian waters. We therefore include this species neither in the checklist nor in the list of possible Australian sea snakes and regard all the Australian specimens referred to H. melanocephalus as belonging to the taxon H. coggeri.	en	Rasmussen, Arne Redsted, Sanders, Kate Laura, Guinea, Michael L., Amey, Andrew P. (2014): Sea snakes in Australian waters (Serpentes: subfamilies Hydrophiinae and Laticaudinae) - a review with an updated identification key. Zootaxa 3869 (4): 351-371, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3869.4.1
038F87C0FFA7FFC9FF48F95EFE40F876.taxon	discussion	Shuntov (1971) suggested that 19 % of the trawled specimens from shoal waters of the northwest coast of Australian belong to Hydrophis melanosoma. This claim was cited by several subsequent authors (e. g. Cogger, 1975; Cogger et al., 1983; Minton, 1975), although Cogger (1992) considered the presence of H. melanosoma in Australian waters as “ uncertain ”. The identifications by Shuntov lacks validation by any specimen of H. melanosoma having been collected or reported from this area since. Shuntov’s identification, in our opinion, was incorrect. We therefore exclude H. melanosoma from the checklist and the list of possible Australian sea snakes.	en	Rasmussen, Arne Redsted, Sanders, Kate Laura, Guinea, Michael L., Amey, Andrew P. (2014): Sea snakes in Australian waters (Serpentes: subfamilies Hydrophiinae and Laticaudinae) - a review with an updated identification key. Zootaxa 3869 (4): 351-371, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3869.4.1
038F87C0FFA0FFCEFF48FF22FCE6FD96.taxon	discussion	McDowell (1972) mentioned Hydrophis obscurus for the first time in the Australian region based on a single specimen from the east bank of the Fly River opposite Sturt Island, Papua New Guinea. Cogger (1975), Minton (1975) and Cogger et al. (1983) followed McDowell (1972) in recognising H. obscurus from Australia. However, Kharin (1984 b) later described a new species, H. vorisi, based on McDowell’s description of the Fly River specimen and referred a second specimen (MCZ 141979) from the same area to this new species. Both specimens of H. vorisi are thus recorded from the southern coast of New Guinea (Kharin, 1984 b, 2004 b) excluding the species from Australian waters. However, we include the species in the possible Australian species list because, given this species’ occurrence on the south coast of New Guinea, it may be found in Australian waters in future. Concerning H. obscurus, we have found no evidence or specimens to support its occurring in the Australian region. We therefore regard H. obscurus as an Asian endemic known only from the east coast of India, Bangladesh and Myanmar (David & Ineich, 1999; M. A. Smith, 1926).	en	Rasmussen, Arne Redsted, Sanders, Kate Laura, Guinea, Michael L., Amey, Andrew P. (2014): Sea snakes in Australian waters (Serpentes: subfamilies Hydrophiinae and Laticaudinae) - a review with an updated identification key. Zootaxa 3869 (4): 351-371, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3869.4.1
038F87C0FFA0FFCEFF48FDDEFAD5FB9E.taxon	discussion	Smith (1926) regarded H. ocellatus to be a subspecies of H. ornatus and referred Australian specimens previously included in H. ornatus to it. Later, H. o. ocellatus was raised to species level because of its distinctive DNA, colour pattern and a higher number of midbody scale rows compared with H. o. ornatus in Asia | (Rasmussen, Murphy, et al., 2011; Sanders, Lee, et al., 2013; L. A. Smith, 1974). However, the name H. ornatus is still used by most authors in Australia (Brewer et al., 2006; Cogger, 1975, 2007; Lukoschek & Keogh, 2006; Wells, 2007; Wilson & Swan, 2010). Hydrophis ocellatus is a widespread species found in most tropical and subtropical Australian waters (Brewer et al., 2006; Cogger, 1975, 2007; Redfield et al., 1978; L. A. Smith, 1974; Ward, 2000; Wassenberg, Milton, & Burridge, 2001). We have found no specimens or been otherwise able to confirm H. ornatus occurs in Australian waters. All the records we have examined of this complex belong to H. ocellatus. It is interesting that specimens of H. ornatus but not H. ocellatus have been collected in New Caledonia waters (Ineich & Rasmussen, 1997), indicating that the two species exclude each other in some regions. There is no evidence that H. ornatus does occur in Australian waters. We therefore include H ornatus neither in the checklist nor in the list of possible Australian sea snakes.	en	Rasmussen, Arne Redsted, Sanders, Kate Laura, Guinea, Michael L., Amey, Andrew P. (2014): Sea snakes in Australian waters (Serpentes: subfamilies Hydrophiinae and Laticaudinae) - a review with an updated identification key. Zootaxa 3869 (4): 351-371, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3869.4.1
038F87C0FFA0FFCEFF48FBD6FD33F986.taxon	discussion	McDowell (1972) mentioned a specimen from Sepik River, East Sepik District, New Guinea (AMNH 104340) that was very similar to the ‘ beaked sea snake’, H. schistosus, but showed some morphological characters which were not in accordance with H. schistosus. Later Kharin (1985) described a new species, Enhydrina zweifeli, based on McDowell´s (1972) data. The similarity with H. schistosus is striking. However, a recently published paper presented molecular evidence showing the two species represent distinct lineages and are not each other’s closest relatives, indicating convergent phenotypic evolution probably related to a specialist diet of large, spiny prey (Ukuwela, de Silva, Fry, Lee, & Sanders, 2012). Morphological analysis of 18 specimens from the Asian region and 12 specimens from Australia suggested the specimens in Australian waters all belong to H. zweifeli based on scale counts and colour pattern characters, thus excluding H. schistosus from Australian waters (Ukuwela, de Silva, et al., 2012). However, more molecular and morphological analyses of additional specimens are needed to determine the precise distributions of the two species (Ukuwela, de Silva, et al., 2012). Based on the above, we exclude H. schistosus from the list of sea snakes occurring in Australian waters in favour of H. zweifeli	en	Rasmussen, Arne Redsted, Sanders, Kate Laura, Guinea, Michael L., Amey, Andrew P. (2014): Sea snakes in Australian waters (Serpentes: subfamilies Hydrophiinae and Laticaudinae) - a review with an updated identification key. Zootaxa 3869 (4): 351-371, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3869.4.1
038F87C0FFA0FFCEFF48F9EEFD01F8E0.taxon	discussion	Ineich and Rasmussen (1997) mentioned H. spiralis for the first time in New Caledonia, which is surprising, as it has never been collected in Australian waters. The known distributions of H. spiralis are the Persian Gulf in the west to Vietnam in the east, Indonesia including Java and Sulawesi in the south (David & Ineich, 1999; Rasmussen, Elmberg, et al., 2011). Whether it was a vagrant specimen from Asia or there is a population at New Caledonia is uncertain, but with only one specimen collected from New Caledonia without precise locality (Ineich & Rasmussen, 1997), we do not include it in the possible list until further specimens have confirmed its presence closer to Australian waters.	en	Rasmussen, Arne Redsted, Sanders, Kate Laura, Guinea, Michael L., Amey, Andrew P. (2014): Sea snakes in Australian waters (Serpentes: subfamilies Hydrophiinae and Laticaudinae) - a review with an updated identification key. Zootaxa 3869 (4): 351-371, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3869.4.1
038F87C0FFA0FFCFFF48F8CEFE16FEEB.taxon	discussion	M. gracilis is mentioned by M. A. Smith (1926) as occurring in Australia based on one specimen at the Australian Museum in Sydney (AMR 6719). Cogger (1975) regarded this specimen as of doubtful provenance, but mentioned another from the Gulf of Papua (MCR 142375), indicating M. gracilis does occur in Australian waters. The specimens mentioned as M. gracilis at the Museum Victoria, Melbourne turned out to be H. elegans (examined by ARR). Ineich and Rasmussen (1997) could not confirm M. gracilis in New Caledonian waters as the specimens identified by Gail and Rageau (1958) turned out to be H. coggeri. We have found no evidence to include this species in the checklist, but based on the specimen from Gulf of Papua we include it in the possible list.	en	Rasmussen, Arne Redsted, Sanders, Kate Laura, Guinea, Michael L., Amey, Andrew P. (2014): Sea snakes in Australian waters (Serpentes: subfamilies Hydrophiinae and Laticaudinae) - a review with an updated identification key. Zootaxa 3869 (4): 351-371, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3869.4.1
038F87C0FFA1FFCFFF48FEDAFBE7FC0E.taxon	discussion	The countries around Australia have at least six Laticauda species (Cogger & Heatwole, 2006; Heatwole et al., 2005). In the literature two species are reported from Australian waters: L. colubrina and L. laticaudata (Cogger, 1975; Minton, 1975; M. A. Smith, 1926). At least 3 specimens of L. colubrina are deposited in the Australian Museum, Sydney: AMS R 20883 from Sydney, R 2954 from Wollongong, and R 11524 from Victorian N. Hill and one from Museum Victoria, Melbourne: D 4276 from Sydney. Three of the localities are in New South Wales and indicate the specimens are waifs, one is from inland western Victoria (the desert town Northern Hill) indicating a wrong locality. At least three Australian specimens of L. laticaudata are deposited in museum collections, one in BMNH: 55.10.16.439 from Tasmania, one in ZMUC: 66265 from Sydney and one in Museum Victoria, Melbourne 60287 from Torres Strait also indicating waif specimens. We have found no further specimens reported from Australia indicating that Laticauda is not breeding in Australian waters despite there being breeding populations from surrounding countries (Bonnet, Brischoux, Pearson, & Rivalan, 2009; Brischoux & Bonnet, 2009). McCarthy (1986) suggests that competition from the Aipysurus species might, at least in part, be responsible for the rarity of Laticauda in Australian waters. Greer (1997) suggests that it may be due to the absence of coastal limestone rocks in northern Australia which is the preferred sheltering and egg-laying sites for these species. Further investigation in the northern part of coastal Australia is much needed before we can include Laticauda in the checklist; however, we include Laticauda sp. in the possible list.	en	Rasmussen, Arne Redsted, Sanders, Kate Laura, Guinea, Michael L., Amey, Andrew P. (2014): Sea snakes in Australian waters (Serpentes: subfamilies Hydrophiinae and Laticaudinae) - a review with an updated identification key. Zootaxa 3869 (4): 351-371, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3869.4.1
038F87C0FFA2FFCCFF48FD97FA53F89F.taxon	discussion	Identifying sea snakes to species level is not an easy task. The genus Hydrophis in particular shows great interspecific and intraspecific variation and interspecific convergence making identification problematic when using only external characters. The key is based primarily on counting ventral scales and scale rows around the neck and body, but shape and size of the head and the position of the maxillary bone are other distinguishing characters. A combination of characters are required to identify a specimen. In using the key it is important that all the identifying characters fit with the specimen at each step in the key. If this is not the case, the alternative “ not as above ” should be followed. When counting scale rows around the neck and body it is important to note that the count around the neck is a minimum count and the count around the body is a maximum count (as in Smith, 1926). Record the minimum count of three or four scale rows around the neck at one and a half head lengths, two, two and a half, and three head lengths behind the head. The maximum number of body scales occurs just behind midbody, but three to four counts between midbody and vent are required. The most precise scale row count follows a transverse line across the dorsal surface of the body starting from a ventral scale to a ventral scale on the other side of the body (Thomas, 1976). Ventral scales are excluded from the count of scale rows. “ Ground colour ” refers to the colour between the darker dorsal markings or bands (if present), and is generally the same as the colour on the ventral side. “ Bands ” here refers to darkish transverse markings anywhere on the body. Drawings are by Mogens Andersen ZMUC. The nomenclature follows Sanders, Lee, et al. (2013).	en	Rasmussen, Arne Redsted, Sanders, Kate Laura, Guinea, Michael L., Amey, Andrew P. (2014): Sea snakes in Australian waters (Serpentes: subfamilies Hydrophiinae and Laticaudinae) - a review with an updated identification key. Zootaxa 3869 (4): 351-371, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3869.4.1
