Reptile & Amphibian Forums

I noticed that the ruthveni kind of looks similar to a zonata - is it a kingsnake, a milk snake or a mountain kingsnake? i am a bit confused about it... also something about ruthveni being able to produce fertile young if mated with other milksnakes or mtn kings? is that abnormal? Basically what is the dealio with these snakes? they do seem pretty cool

It's of the genus Lampropeltis, which basically consists of:

Lampropeltis alterna
Grey-Banded Kingsnake

Lampropeltis calligaster
Prairie and Mole Kingsnakes

Lampropeltis getula
Common Kingsnakes

Lampropeltis mexicana
Durango Mountain, Nuevo Leon, Thayeri, etc.

Lampropeltis pyromelana
Arizona Mountain Kingsnakes

Lampropeltis ruthveni
Ruthven's Kingsnake

Lampropeltis triangulum
Milk Snakes

Lampropeltis zonata
California Mountain Kingsnake

A Lampropeltis getula californiae that I found in Vegas a couple months ago:

Third Eye

>>I noticed that the ruthveni kind of looks similar to a zonata - is it a kingsnake, a milk snake or a mountain kingsnake? i am a bit confused about it... also something about ruthveni being able to produce fertile young if mated with other milksnakes or mtn kings? is that abnormal? Basically what is the dealio with these snakes? they do seem pretty cool

I've seen some speculation by people smarter than I that ruthveni might be at the center of several of the Lampropeltis species tim lists, that several of those species might have evolved from ruthveni as the root source, if that makes sense. The relationships are close, but complicated and not known with certainty, I don't think.

Yes, they can produce fertile young if bred to other Lampropeltis. But once that's done you can never ID those offspring as a specific species. Many of us prize the wild type and prefer to breed to sustain that heritage. That's as controversial a topic as the species' relationships is complicated!

Very well stated by both you and Tim!

I can't add much of anything to those two responses!

~Doug
-----
"a snake in the grass is a GOOD thing"

my website -serpentinespecialties.webs.com

Yeah, thanks. I just wondered if they were somehow considered the progenitor of the other snakes or something since they can produce fertile young - i saw an albino one of these --- looks pretty cool. I noticed in Hubbs' book he discusses these to be mtn kings - why is that - the high band count or something?

They used to be classified as "Lampropeltis m. ruthveni"(now simply L. ruthveni)their own distinct species, and seem to be(at least they were until DNA testing) very closely related to the other members of the mexicana complex. And since some of those forms, as well as ruthveni are often found in fairly high elevations such as the Durango Mountain king(L.m.greeri), many tend to consider them a form of "mountain king" of sorts.

Same thing with the alterna(Gray-Banded king), now is it's own species and no longer recognized as a ssp. of mexicana.

Yes, all very confusing, so don't feel alone on this. Lots of people have been, and will be scratching their heads for a long time to come regarding alot of this stuff..

~Doug

-----
"a snake in the grass is a GOOD thing"

my website -serpentinespecialties.webs.com

You can consider them a montane kingsnake (mountain king) because they live in a higher elevation plateau region in Mexico.

Any kingsnake bred with any milksnake can produce fertile young. Any. It isn't just ruthveni crosses. There are size considerations of course - I haven't seen a male Florida king breed a Mexican milksnake female for example, but as far as milks and kings go, there have been more crosses made than you know.

The thing with ruthveni however is that a ruthveni crossed to a Pueblan milksnake for example looks a heck of alot like a Pueblan in the first generation. Many 1st generation ruthveni crossed with whatever look like the whatever, if the whatever is a milksnake from Mexico or a montane kingsnake. Again, it is typically done with like-sized specimens. Ruthveni can get quite large depeding on the locality I presume. I saw some Lemke line ones in the early 80s that were really thick snakes. In fact, my first impression with ruthveni was that they were giant mtn kings. I don't see those anymore. Probably a locality thing.
-----
Mark

>>I noticed that the ruthveni kind of looks similar to a zonata - is it a kingsnake, a milk snake or a mountain kingsnake? i am a bit confused about it... also something about ruthveni being able to produce fertile young if mated with other milksnakes or mtn kings? is that abnormal? Basically what is the dealio with these snakes? they do seem pretty cool

L. ruthveni is traditionally considered part of the mexicana group, which consists of L. zonata, L. pyromelana, L. alterna and L. mexicana , but guess what, the mexicana group may well be polyphyletic. Many herpetologists consider mexicana to be the same species as L. alterna or at least its sister species, but there is a paper out within the last few years (see link) that suggests L. alterna may not be closely related to L. mexicana at all. In this analysis, ruthveni came out as closely related to L. m. greeri, L. m. mexicana, L. triangulum arcifera, L. t. campbelli and L. t. conanti, but L. alterna is closest to L. m. thayeri and L. t. celaenops (Big Bend Milk Snake). Weird as the results may be, there is some corroboration from the morphological studies of this genus dating nearly a century ago, by Frank Blanchard, who did not consider the members of the mexicana complex closely related.

The genus Lampropeltis is in need of revision. So far the available studies have not included all of the known species and subspecies that have been described. As a result, the current taxonomic arrangement may undergo some needed changes in the near future.
A phylogeny of the Lampropeltis mexicana complex...