|
1-10 of 13 messages
|
Page 1 of 2
Next
|
|
Horridus and Atricadautus
|
Reply
|
|
by TheFifthDay on October 2, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
How can you tell these two apart?
I've heard some people say that there is a scale count difference.. Which scales are of a different count?
And is the range really a good way to tell?
Thanks in advance for your help,
Jon Short
|
| |
|
RE: Horridus and Atricadautus
|
Reply
|
|
by Crotalusssp on October 2, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Atriadactus is not a recognized sub-species any longer, although many are not happy about or agree with that. For what many people call Canebrake's there is a range for them, that is generally recognized. As far as scale counts, I am not really all that familiar with them, but I believe that sub-caudal is the most commonly used method.
|
| |
|
RE: Horridus and Atricadautus
|
Reply
|
|
by pictigaster1 on October 2, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
You know Jon this is the question of the ages.There guys like John z and Chuck Herd that can take them out of a barrel and tell you what they are and where they came from.Yet ww says they are only color variants of the same species.I would ask one of them in pm, this question has been visited here several times and always comes to a stale mate
|
| |
|
RE: Horridus and Atricadautus
|
Reply
|
|
by Ptk on October 2, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Hi Jon,
I asked the same question here awhile back - this was the response I got (some good information).
Best of luck
Patrick
http://www.venomousreptiles.org/forums/Experts/39274
|
| |
|
RE: Horridus and Atricadautus
|
Reply
|
|
by ChuckHurd on October 2, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
It’s a fascinating question. There is no accord as to the answer. Is a full grown NY timber this is 18 inches long and jet black the same species as a south GA cane that is hot pink and 6 feet long. There is a different color, pattern, size, shape of the head, venom, ect. I am not a geneticist, but is seems to me there is enough different there to distinguish the two. Some state, VA for example, still draw a clear distention. You can keep a “timber” in the state, but you cannot keep a “cane.” Dr. Gordon W. Schuett is a friend of mine. For those that do not know him, he wrote Biology of the Vipers and is regarded as the world’s foremost expert in North American Pit Vipers. The last time he was at my house, he told me, and this is not hearsay, straight from his mouth to my ear: “They are a different species.” He told me that he was working the DNA now and when released he was going to break the cane and the western cotton of form the other as its on separate species.
|
| |
|
RE: Horridus and Atricadautus
|
Reply
|
|
by agkistrodude on October 3, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I agree with Chuck and others that they have many differences. Here's an article written by Chad Minter on this site with his view of the subject...
http://www.venomousreptiles.org/articles/225
Chuck, anyway to get an update from Dr. Gordon W. Schuett? Take care, Marty
|
| |
|
RE: Horridus and Atricadautus
|
Reply
|
|
by Nightflight99 on October 7, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Interestingly enough, coloration, pattern, size, etc. are all traits that can vary for a number of reasons, and are generally unreliable indicators with regard to speciation. Furthermore, this is not a question that is to be "answered" by any single individual, be that the world's foremost ueber-herpetologist or not. Science - including herpetology - does not work that way. Instead, you ought to examine the available and published evidence, and subsequently decide for yourself whether or not the southern form deserves to be elevated or synonymized. With a bit of time and effort, anyone can understand the basic evidence, and the logical conclusions that can be derived from it.
~TE
|
| |
|
RE: Horridus and Atricadautus
|
Reply
|
|
by Cro on October 7, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I really find this topic interesting.
If we look at this summery on Wikipedia, we see "The subspecies C. h. atricaudatus (Latreille in Sonnini and Latreille, 1802), often referred to as the canebrake rattlesnake,[2] is currently considered invalid.[14] Previously, it was recognized by Gloyd (1936) and Klauber (1936). Based on an analysis of geographic variation, Pisani et al. (1972) concluded that no subspecies should be recognized. This was rejected by Conant (1975), but followed by Collins and Knight (1980). Brown and Ernst (1986) found evidence for retaining the two subspecies, but state that it is not possible to tell them apart without having more information than usual, including adult size, color pattern, the number of dorsal scale rows and the number of ventral scales. Dundee and Rossman (1989) recognized atricaudatus, but others take a more neutral point of view.[5]"
And the #5 reference is of course: Campbell JA, Lamar WW. 2004. The Venomous Reptiles of the Western Hemisphere. 2 volumes. Comstock Publishing Associates, Ithaca and London. 870 pp. 1500 plates. ISBN 0-8014-4141-2.
Note that most of the above are in the days before mDNA was in common use. If Dr. Gordon W. Schuett is going to challenge Campbell and Lamar, he better do it soon.
The one thing I would question though, is this Thomas.
You state that "With a bit of time and effort, anyone can understand the basic evidence."
I would counter, that most of the folks who have a interest in this do not have access to the new genetic research to study. If would be great if those of you who are "in the loop" concerning modern research would provide links to where folks can download pdf files of the results of that research. Most of us do not have the funds to subscribe to the various journals, and most of us do not have access to university libraries.
How about providing a few links for the folks to read ?
Even better, why don't you tackle the Timber / Canebrake question ? I would love to see what conclusions that you come up with on this issue !
Best Regards
John Z
|
| |
|
RE: Horridus and Atricadautus
|
Reply
|
|
by Nightflight99 on October 7, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Hi John -
You're right, many of the academic journals require subscriptions to access full articles. However, many public libraries provide access to the more common journals, and nearly all are able to get you specific articles via interlibrary loans, even from obscure journals.
I'm always happy to provide pdf files of any articles that people are interested in. Just shoot me an e-mail with the appropriate citation(s), and I will get them to you as soon as possible. This goes for any of the readers of this forum, by the way.
There are tons of taxa that are taxonomically problematic and systematically intriguing, and I've been working on a select few of these cases for some time now. While C. horridus are some of my favorites among the rattlesnakes, a fair amount of work has already been done to address the systematics of that taxon, and my time is thus much better spend working on other systems that are in much more dire need of systematic review.
~TE
|
| |
|
RE: Horridus and Atricadautus
|
Reply
|
|
by Cro on October 8, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Thanks Thomas !
Your offer to help folks obtain pdf files from the difficult to find journals is greatly appreciated.
There are a couple in particular that I have been searching for, and I will let you know the titles of them soon.
Keep us informed on the animal groups you are working on. The more the scientific community makes their work available to interested folks, the higher the education levels will be, which is a very good thing for this hobby.
Best Regards
John Z
|
| |
|
Email Subscription
You are not subscribed to this topic.
Subscribe!
My Subscriptions
Subscriptions Help
Check our help page for help using
, or send questions, comments, or suggestions to the
Manager.
|
