Vertebrate paleontology is heavily dependent on the ability to differentiate between different species in a way that is consistent both within a particular genus and across all organisms. The genus
Bothriolepis is no exception to this principle. Listed below are a few of the notable species within
Bothriolepis; more than sixty species have been named in total, and it is likely that a sizeable proportion of them are valid due to the cosmopolitan nature of
Bothriolepis. The external
skeleton of
Bothriolepis canadensis is made of cellular dermal bone tissue and is characterized by distinct horizontal zonation or stratification. The model fish has an average total length of and an average dermal armor length of , which accounts for 35.6% of the estimated total length. is the
Bothriolepis species known from the highest
paleolatitude, being described from deposits originally laid down within the
Late Devonian Antarctic circle. Remains have exclusively been recovered from a single carbonaceous shale near the top of the Late Devonian,
Famennian, Witpoort Formation (Witteberg Group) exposed in a road cutting south of Makhanda/
Grahamstown in South Africa. This site, the
Waterloo Farm lagerstätte is interpreted as representing a back barrier coastal lagoonal setting with both marine and fluvial influences. Gess observed that
Bothriolepis was less abundant at the Waterloo Farm site than at most
Bothriolepis-bearing localities, though a full ontogenetic series is represented. The head and trunk armour lengths ranged between which translates, based on the proportions of two of the smallest individuals (in which tail impressions are preserved) into full body lengths varying between . According to original description,
Bothriolepis africana was considered to be most closely similar to
Bothriolepis barretti from the late
Givetian of
Antarctica. The similarities between the two have been used to suggest derivation of
Bothriolepis africana from an East
Gondwanan environment. This species, found in present-day
Pennsylvania, was originally described by J. Leidy in 1856. As mentioned above, there is much debate regarding the distinguishability between
B. nitida and
B. virginiensis, however based on evidence presented by Weems (2004), Characteristics that distinguish
B. virginiensis from other species include but are not limited to fused head sutures, fused elements in adult distal pectoral fin segments and long premedian plate relative to headshield length. == References ==