Reptile & Amphibian Forums

They are sometimes called “Cottonheads.” Some more strongly represent copperheads and some more strongly represent cottonmouths, but if you pay close attention, one can destructively see both in these amazing snakes.

We know very little about the genetics of these right now, but Carl Person at the university in Loma Linda, CA is running some tests.

Also very little is known about the venom, but Dr Bryan Frye intends to research some of the samples from my snakes.

All that I have been in direct contact with show hybrid-vigor. It is thought that by breeding genetically different snakes such as hybrids or separate localities, you “splice” back together genes that were long ago separated by location, time, and inner species evolution. (I certainly do not believe in cross species evolution. A fish did not turn into a copperhead or cottonmouth, but I do think it highly likely they did come from a common ancestor.) All are ferocious eaters with above average growth rates.

It was widely thought that since they are a hybrid, they would be infertile, but last year I teamed up with Bart Borchert and we produced the world’s first F2 copperhead x cottonmouth hybrids. (F2 = second generation)

The color and pattern combinations are incredible and seem to change with age. I have 4 total: a captive born pair (female Mardi Snipes 2005 & male Bart Borchert 2007), an unrelated female captive born 2007 in coastal SC, and a wild caught female collected in GA. As the captives grow, the parental resemblance seems to fluctuate. My 2005 female began to show a black iridescent tint at about 3 years old. My 2007 CB SC female is now showing somewhat of a reddish tint. Roark Ferguson has a male from the same littler as my 2005 female. My girl shows way more copperhead, as were his male shows much more cottonmouth.- apparently wide verity among litter mates is the norm. Dr Lee Spencer, of Southern University, is an expert in genetics. He told me that he expected the F2 (second) generation to come out something similar to 25% copperhead, 25% cottonmouth, and 50% hybrid. The one F2 litter produced was not large enough to confirm, but future litters should enlighten us as to weather or not this will be the case.

This is my CB 2005 female and the only known proven breeder female in the world. She was produced by Mardi Snipes from a large male southern copperhead from Savannah, GA bred to a female FL cottonmouth form Lake Okeechobee, FL.

This is my CB 2007 male. He is from the same parents as female.

This is my CB 2007 female. She was produced in error by a commercial collector who captures mass quantities of copperhead and cottonmouths and houses them together in an outdoor pin. She was found in the pin among other babies, so it is not known which species was mother and which was father. (note to that, all that we know of born in captivity have been male copperhead to female cottonmouth)

This is my GA female that was collected in Hancock County, GA. She was collected in 2006 by Matt King and taken to Chad Mintor, author of Venomous Reptiles of the Southeast. I acquired her from Chad last year.

This is the only known F2 copperhead x cottonmouth hybrid, produced from my CB 2005 female and her brother, owned by Bart Borchert.

This is a picture (couple years old) of the CB 2005 male owned by Bart Borchert.

This is a picture (one year old) of the CB 2005 male owned by Roark Ferguson. This was a littler mate to Bart and my 05’s but note the extreme color difference.

Here are a couple picture of the original F1 snakes (parents of the 05’s)

This picture was emailed to me. The owner and origin are unknown to me.

I know very little about this snake, but was what I was told unofficially, it was produced form a Trans Pecos Copperhead male to a FL cottonmouth Female.

I am very interested in the study of these hybrids. If anyone has any further information or pictures, please feel encouraged to post on this thread.

Chuck Hurd Serpentology

(I certainly do not believe in cross species evolution. A fish did not turn into a copperhead or cottonmouth, but I do think it highly likely they did come from a common ancestor.)

I don't understand how you can have one without the other (intraspecies and interspecies evolution). No competent evolutionary biologist will tell you that a fish turned directly into a copperhead or a cottonmouth. The changes are gradual over a long period of time. Your post states that you believe in intraspecies variation and evolution, but not evolution from one species to another. Then you follow up by saying you think the animals came from a common ancestor, which would mean one species involving into another. Are you talking in circles again Chuck?

Thank you for that question. It was well thought out and I hope I can explain it equally as well. I was over simplifying by saying a fish turned into a copperhead. Just mainly making the point I do not buy into evolution. That was mostly tongue and cheek. But, to your point, I do not think Noah had a copperhead and a cottonmouth on the ark. I think over the last 6000 years, the snake that was on the ark developed into the copperhead and cottonmouth of today. Don’t see at all how that is circular? I believe snakes can vary depending on location. My timbers from NY max out at 2.5 feet. I have timbers from KY that are well over 4 feet. It’s just an adaptation to their environment.
Chuck Hurd Serpentology

Okay... I think I see what you're saying here. You believe that all the variation in snakes has arisen in the last 6,000 years from a common ancestor, and that interspecies evolution has occurred, but don't believe that evolution from one taxa to another at a higher level has occurred if I'm understanding you correctly? While the scientific evidence demonstrates otherwise, I will digress and keep the topic on the hybrids posted.

Nice pictures of the hybrids, shows a lot of variation. I think many snake species are relatively closely related and suspect that much of the ideas of hybrids being sterile comes from the cross breeding of hoof stock. I suspect that hybrids from close relatives of snake species will be able to produce viable offspring than what we observe in other taxa. While I'm not crazy about hybrids, it is rather curious to see what happens when hybridization does occur. I personally believe that copperhead/cottonmouth hybrids occur in the wild more often than we give them credit for.

I think you are very close to what I believe. I am not of the mindset that a python and a rattlesnake came from the same ancestor, but I would go as far as to say all rattlesnake species and sub species came from one rattlesnake. Likewise, today’s copperheads, cottonmouths, cantils, ect, came from one ancestor originally.

It is important to remember that species and sub species ect, are all man made ideas. It called science, but it is always subject to trends. Few years ago the trend was to separate everything. 2 sub species of Timber, 3 sub species of cottonmouth, and 5 sub species of copperhead. Now days, the trend is to group them back together. So, what was “science” proven by “evidence” a few years ago, is now considered wrong. Many now say there is only 1 species of timber and 2 cottonmouth and 2 copperhead. If the trends continue, perhaps next someone will say, ok….the copper and cotton are not 2 difference species, they are a sub species of each other. I have already proven that they can breed and the offspring are fertile, so it is not a far fetched idea.
Chuck Hurd Serpentology

Well, maybe since this critter is aquatic, Noah left it off the ark . . .

But it sure looks like a fish that has started to turn into a frog-like animal to me . . .

http://www.bountyfishing.com/blog/images/mudskipper.jpg

Then there's this guy . . . Lays eggs but nurses its young from specially modified areas on it's underbelly; no boobies . . . It's a montotreme (a description that refers to its cloaca), and its relative, the platypus, has some similarities but a duck's beak and the male has a venom spike on its hind legs . . .

Sort of intermittent species between reptiles, birds, and mammalss, wouldn't you say?

And the fact that cottonmouths and copperheads can interbreed is proof there are "transitional species" (gotta address those talking points they fill you with; all species extant today are basically "transitional"; it's also likely evidence of past "genetic bottlenecks" (with very small ancestral populations) in those individuals that gave rise to several different species on the evolutionary "bush" (it's much easier to understand visualizing that way).

And how come if there's no evolution, the bushmaster, the largest pit viper, lays eggs while all the other pit vipers are live-bearers?

Evolution is a fact tho it is only a side affect of creation.
-----
Archie Bottoms

I assume there's room for abiogenesis as possibility/probability as a factor in creation?

Abiogenesis is a joke.I will put a rock in a cage and see how long it takes to become a jellyfish.No seriously I do not think life all came about in 6000 years.Yet I see no new life forms ariseing lately so creation seems to have the most credibility with me.Others are free to think as they will I will not try to change them.I think and believe evolution is a fact.I just think it is a by product of creation.Free will brother .I would not knock any one who belives different fact is we will never truely know we do not live long enough.
-----
Archie Bottoms

www.nytimes.com/2009/05/14/science/14rna.html

An English chemist has found the hidden gateway to the RNA world, the chemical milieu from which the first forms of life are thought to have emerged on earth some 3.8 billion years ago.

He has solved a problem that for 20 years has thwarted researchers trying to understand the origin of life — how the building blocks of RNA, called nucleotides, could have spontaneously assembled themselves in the conditions of the primitive earth. The discovery, if correct, should set researchers on the right track to solving many other mysteries about the origin of life. It will also mean that for the first time a plausible explanation exists for how an information-carrying biological molecule could have emerged through natural processes from chemicals on the primitive earth.

I'm not putting this up for you, though. Somewhere out there is a very bright kid, probably a science student somewhere, and if he's reading this and going through what I went through with a couple of "science" teachers, he may find enough wherewithal to persevere. I opted for the English Department--where my aptitude is actually less than my science one--as a means of preserving my sanity. The air can be pretty toxic here on Planet Utah in some classrooms . . .

You see, since I didn't have something like this to wrap my thinking around, I had to listen to these people hollering that there was such a thing as magic . . . Just not something I could believe in . . .

LOL...
-----
Abhishek Prasad

ONFLMAO

Doug T

>>LOL...
>>-----
>>Abhishek Prasad

Chuck,

You're conclusions are based on a limited sample. You're assuming all timbers from NY are small, which is not even remotely close to the truth. The average timber is typically over 3ft and males are typically closer to 4-4.5ft. Even some of the Adirondack populations contain larger specimens. It appears to be more related to level of protection and the age of the snake than anything. Fortunately, NY snakes have been able to attain larger sizes since they were legally protected back in the early 80s (Bill Brown has documented this in his studies, that the overall length and weight of timbers has increased----he even had one tracked for over 30 years!)

This isn't limited to timbers. We've found hognose snakes well over 40inches as well, so while common sense may say "Colder climate, shorter active season, smaller snake"....that's not the case.

Matt

Let's not forget to mention that the Universe is at least 14 billion years old, Earth is at least 4 billion years old and Archaen life existed around 3.5 Billion years ago.

That is unless you live on the event horizon of a black hole. Then all this has happened in the last second.

Doug T

>>Chuck,
>>
>>You're conclusions are based on a limited sample. You're assuming all timbers from NY are small, which is not even remotely close to the truth. The average timber is typically over 3ft and males are typically closer to 4-4.5ft. Even some of the Adirondack populations contain larger specimens. It appears to be more related to level of protection and the age of the snake than anything. Fortunately, NY snakes have been able to attain larger sizes since they were legally protected back in the early 80s (Bill Brown has documented this in his studies, that the overall length and weight of timbers has increased----he even had one tracked for over 30 years!)
>>
>>This isn't limited to timbers. We've found hognose snakes well over 40inches as well, so while common sense may say "Colder climate, shorter active season, smaller snake"....that's not the case.
>>
>>Matt

Yep. Sorry, I merely overlooked the obvious.

MH

I hope your not merely over looking the Yanks Matt!!!!!!!

Randal

No, I scrutinize over them every day.

Thought that would get your attention! How abt Melky? Holy Cow!

First to the owners and moderators of this forum. I did not mean for this to lead into a discussion of evolution and religion. Second, I am sorry it has taken me a few days to get back to you.

Some of you make intelligent and thought provoking points and I thank you for that. That is the reason I like public forums such as this. While, some of you digress to making no meaningful contributions, but enjoy belittling and insults in a manner you would never dream of doing in person. That is what I dislike about public forums and the reason I rarely use them anymore.

Matt, you are 100% right, as you normally are. However, I wasn’t making the point that all NY timbers are small. I would expect the population, as a whole, to become larger, if given the opportunity to live longer. My point was, my timber rattlesnakes form the NY mountains are considered the same species as my canes from south GA, yet my NY timbers are no where near as big as my south GA canes, and they never will be. Different environmental influences have altered them. And if all things remain constant, they will probably secede even further from each other, BUT…and this is important, they will remain rattlesnakes. The canes are not going to develop legs to make it easier to catch prey in the lowlands.

Some of the other responses here are an apex example with what is wrong with internet forums today. In the beginning, one could come onto the early internet reptile forums and read posts from keepers I look up to and respect. It wasn’t unusual to converse with Dr Bryan Fry, Jim Harrison, Dr Ray Hunter, and many others. But, that early success digressed to people who have never really added anything to herptoculture, belittling, arguing, and insulting each other and people they have never met----In many cases people who have added great contributions to herptoculture. Many people whom I respect and would like to hear from have completely abandoned internet forums, and I certainly can see why.

At one time I loved using internet forums. Getting the view point of others always helped me to shape my opinions. Information not available in print often is available straight from the mind of other keepers. However, given the digression of this system, I very rarely use forums anymore. Occasionally I still wish to share and get opinions and I make a post. And unfortunately, I am quickly reminded of the reason I stopped using the forums in the first place.
Chuck Hurd Serpentology

"That's just the way things go."

Readers of internet forums consist of all manner of individuals across the educational spectrum, and I think it is unrealistic to put some material out there and not expect it to be challenged or that there won't be a bit of brouha . . .

And, as I used to say in the writing classes I taught, "I'm only rejecting the writing not the writer." Those who persisted--in spite of the hurt, and yes, criticism hurts--were the ones who made progress. Those who retreated to an injured, victim posture rarely learned anything . . .

Quite simply, there are forces at work in our culture--and every culture--that work against progress and the dissemination of information. Nobody here is doubting the hybrids you produced; indeed "hybrid vigor" is a well-known and documented phenomenon . . .

The conflict arises in the challenge to evolution--and the study of herps includes, in small part, the study of evolution . . . Why, for example, is there so much similarity between the colubrids of Asia and those of the New World? Continental "drift" offers many a much more appealing explanation than stories of a six thousand year "history of the world"?

And progress and new ideas are often met with ill-informed resistance . . . Here's an incredible article I just read on the subject of Edward Jenner and his development of the smallpox vaccine (which itself, is evidence of evolution because of the genetic similarities between the smallpox and cowpox viruses).

www.annals.org/cgi/content/full/127/8_Part_1/635

Yet, despite Jenner's success, and the obvious "victory for humanity" that vaccination represented, there were those who opposed it . . .

At the end of 1796, Jenner sent an article to the Royal Society describing 13 persons who had previously had cowpox in whom variolation had induced no reaction. It also described the experiment with James Phipps. However, Sir Joseph Banks, the President of the Royal Society, and Sir Everard Home rejected the manuscript for publication in Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society. The Council of the Royal Society repulsed Jenner because he was "in variance with established knowledge" and "incredible." Jenner was further warned: "He had better not promulgate such a wild idea if he valued his reputation"

And even today, there are groups who oppose, on religious grounds, the practice of vaccination . . . I do not know if their opposition is rooted in the belief that humans "Should not interfere with God's Will," or is grounded elsewhere . . .

I only know that they are wrong.

Concolor explained it well enough but I'd like to toss in my 2 sentences worth:

You brought up the topic. Attacks on reason should be defended against.

Doug T

Doug Taylor Reptiles

Are those mussaranas man they are nice very cool snakes and a prime example of evolutionary adaptation .
-----
Archie Bottoms

Those are mussuranas. I'm no taxonomical expert, but I think it will be a while before we finally determine the correct assignments for these guys. Clelia clelia, Boiruna maculata are the names commonly used. The Piebald mussurana, which superficially appears to me to be Psuedoboa nigra, appears to be the same snake as the others.

A buddy of mine and I were talking about how they are so "confident". I know, it's anthropomorphizing, but it seems that since they are the boss where they live, they aren't too concerned about people around them. Every story of wild mussuranas I've heard describes a mellow, almost tame animal.

Freakishly strong, Immune to venom, unconcerned about people... yeah these guys rock.

Here's a picture of a big male I no longer have.

Doug T

Doug Taylor Reptiles

The one thing that really interests me is how they constrict and have a toxic venom.A wish list for me, for sure.I would love to know more about that species.Thank you very much for shareing.
-----
Archie Bottoms

Well, gotta throw in my two cents- as an observer to this thread who doesnt know any of you, it wasnt your challenge to Chuckhurds views, or reasoning, that was the main problem here...everyone IS entitled to their views, beliefs,theories,reasoning...
It was the insulting delivery of your challenge to his views that was uncalled for. That is the type of thing that often makes forums intolerable.
There is a difference between exchanging views and insulting someone.

I'm not sure what was insulting. Chuck stated his belief that Cottonmouths and Copperheads likely evolved from a single species, which as far as I can figure is true. Then some beliefs were stated that they did not evolve from something else and that the earth is 6000 years old. These latter statements are demonstrably and verifiably false. My views or anyone else's views are irrelevant when the facts are available to all. Incredulity is not a valid defense.

This forum is used as an educational tool for many of us trying to learn about venomous reptiles. Those who should feel most insulted are those who had creationist ideals stated as facts to them in a forum based on the quest for increased knowledge about the biology Venomous Reptiles.

Below is a pic of a mu' chowing down on some DOR. The picture was taken by John Gunn of AZ.

Doug T

>>Well, gotta throw in my two cents- as an observer to this thread who doesnt know any of you, it wasnt your challenge to Chuckhurds views, or reasoning, that was the main problem here...everyone IS entitled to their views, beliefs,theories,reasoning...
>> It was the insulting delivery of your challenge to his views that was uncalled for. That is the type of thing that often makes forums intolerable.
>>There is a difference between exchanging views and insulting someone.

Doug Taylor Reptiles

It is hard to be insulted by another mans beliefs .There is no threat to any ones knowledge or beliefs .Like I stated earlyer free will.This is the USA and we can believe what we choose that does not mean we can not learn from one another.At one time the world was thought to be flat.If you try to force your beliefs upon some one then that could be a problem.I try to expand my knowledge on a daily basis.Creation is in my opinion no threat to evolution or vice versa I believe they complament each other .I could be wrong but this is what I believe.I respect every ones right to free will as we all should.We should never belittle a person for there beliefs .For it is there right to believe as they choose. Doug I do love those mus they do rock.
-----
Archie Bottoms