Well, in my humble opinion the Irian Jaya "Carpet" Pythons, are different from a true Carpet(think Jungle) python because of a few things and because of these differences I feel representing a I.J. X Chondro hybrid as a "Carpondro" is incorrect.



My main contention is body structure. If you have ever held both, then you know that Carpets are thicker bodied, and usually longer as well, are semi-arboreal but mainly spend their time on the ground, and are more prone to eating small mammals. On the other hand Irian Jayas, due to island isolation and evolution, have evolved into a more specialized niche, trading off their bulk in order to spend more time arboreally hunting birds, as they are the most common food prey item in island populations.



If you look back to Darwin, when he was in the Galapogos studying finches, he found several "species" with common mainland based ancestry, that had evolved just like the Irian Jayas into specialized niches. The phenotypic differences(visually observable characteristics) such as size, beak shape, color, etc gave each finch species/sub-species an advantage within its' specialized island niche.



Now you are probably asking, how does this relate to the Irian Jaya Pythons? Well, visibly(color/pattern)they are very similar to the mainland based Jungle Carpet Pythons, but in their structural build they are much differently adapted for survival, and much like the finches have evolved seperately and distinctly from their mainland counterparts.



But I guess in the end, it comes down to semantics. When I hear a snake refferred to as a Carpet Python, I think "Jungle Carpet Python", not "Irian Jaya", not "Coastal", etc. Maybe that is just my peculiarity, but I have heard these terms used generically and in this reference many times within the herp community.



Here's another example, if you bred a Super Dwarf Reticulated Python with a Dwarf Burmese what would the progeny be? Bateaters? NOPE! They would be Mini-Bateaters. This is a good example, even though it hasn't happened yet, because both dwarf varieties are I believe derived from island forms of both parent species.



So, in closing I guess I'll just say this, it really just depends on the phylogeny and the semantics being used, all else is just wasted time arguing. Personally though, I would feel that the animal would be misrepresented if it was an Irian Jaya X Chondro hybrid, and was being sold as a Carpondro. Also in my opinion, I would say that the animals described above should be represented as either Irian Jaya Carpondros, or with a new name which specifically describes an Irian Jaya X Chondro hybrid.



Well hope this helps, and if you disagree please post here again or email me, as this discussion interests me deeply.



Thanks,

Dan

[ Show Entire Thread ]