|
11-14 of 14 messages
|
Previous
Page 2 of 2
|
|
RE: red diamondback rattlesnake
|
Reply
|
|
by bush_viper17 on March 9, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
He also still uses Corallus enydris. Im not sure but I think Gloydius was still being used as Agkistrodon in his book.
|
| |
|
RE: red diamondback rattlesnake
|
Reply
|
|
by Snakeman1982 on March 9, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Green Anaconda is a valid common name. Whether it was in the original publication that described the species, which I highly doubt since it was surely named before they started including common names along with species new descriptions. It is used extensively in the common literature.
Here are just a couple of examples.
"Aquatic forms range from stream-dwelling species less than 1 m long to the Green Anaconda (Eunectes murinus)at 8 m or more." (Greene pg. 46)
"In some mating aggregations several suitors struggle for the intromission with a single larger female (e.g., Green Anacondas [Eunectes murinus], Grass snake [Natrix natrix]), with the most vigorous male perhaps favored to win." (Greene pg. 127)
Also just as good examples of this common name being used on pages 131, 132, 155, 157, 162, 282 of the book Snakes: The Evolution of Mystery in Nature by Harry W. Greene.
"GREEN ANACONDA
The green anaconda or water boa (Eunectes murinus) is the best known of four species of anacondas, all of which live in South America." (Ernst and Zug pg. 85)
Also uses the common name in pages 78,86, and 89 of Carl Ernst and George Zug's "Snakes in Question".
The only reference I can find that helps your cause is in "The Encyclopedia of Snakes" by Chris Mattison pages 18 and page 102 where it mentions the word anaconda as though it were a species itself and then followed by the scientific name E. murinus. Once again, this is why you can't trust easy to read Barnes and Noble literature. However, in the same book on page 200 he says, "Eunectes - This is a South American genus, consisting of 2 to 4 species. The green anaconda, E. murinus, and the yellow anaconda, E. notaeus, are well known. The other two, E. deschauenseei and E. barbouri, are sometimes recognized..."
So regradless whether the common name got started in the common usage of the pet trade, though I don't know that because those names generally don't stick in scientific communication, it is still a good common name now.
I am interested in seeing where you got your info,
Robert
|
| |
|
RE: red diamondback rattlesnake
|
Reply
|
|
Anonymous post on March 9, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
You are correct that it is widely used and accepted nowadays. Look in every publication from early on. Much earlier than the 80's. I know times change readily, I am just a stickler for the right people making the right changes. I don't like how the pet trade dictates.....
For some of us old fogies it will always be simply
Anaconda
:( ):
|
| |
|
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.
|
