Reptile & Amphibian Forums

Hello
What is the maximum size known for Philodryas aestivus?
I ask this question because I have a female of 160cm.
Thank you
@

Do you have any pics? I would love to see them.
Thanks,

>>Hello
>>What is the maximum size known for Philodryas aestivus?
>>I ask this question because I have a female of 160cm.

According to all the books, it does not get to more than 100 cm. Are you sure your specimen is P. aestivus? If it is, it should have fairly obviously keeled dorsal scales on closer examination. If it doesn't, it's a different species (and potentially dangerous).

Cheers,

Wolfgang
-----
WW Home

Do I land in fact the question? Is this well P. aestivus? For the meantime I take some precautions, just to the case or!
Here are pictures of bad qualities, but I don't have anything else.
Regard Tom

another picture

>>another picture
>>

Hi Thomas,

Hard to be 100% sure, but from what you are saying and the photos, it seems unlikely to be P. aestivus. As I said, P. aestivus is the only one to have keeled dorsal scales - you should be able to see that on your animal without removing it frm its cage - see arrow in pic here.

If it is not P. aestivus, the it will be either P. olfersii or P. viridissimus, both potentially unpleasant.

Take care,

Wolfgang

-----
WW Home

Thank you.
Effectively, there is not any visible "careening" on the scales of the animal, nor on the molt.
On the other hand, I have a male of 100cm and there one sees "careening."
It would not be therefore about Philodryas aestivus. I thought effectively about Philodryas viridissimus. In the doubt I manipulate the animal with gloves.
Doesn't a key of determination of the Philodryas kind exist?
Regard Tom

>>Thank you.
>>Effectively, there is not any visible "careening" on the scales of the animal, nor on the molt.
>>On the other hand, I have a male of 100cm and there one sees "careening."
>>It would not be therefore about Philodryas aestivus. I thought effectively about Philodryas viridissimus. In the doubt I manipulate the animal with gloves.
>>Doesn't a key of determination of the Philodryas kind exist?
>>Regard Tom

"careening" = keels

How sure are you that both specimens are definitely the same species? Sorry if that seems patronising, but it's got to be asked...

There is a key to Philodryas, but it relies basically on keeling and the numbers of ventral and subcaudal scales. If you have a fully intact shed for both specimens, then that could be useful.

According to the key P. olfersii has has fewer than 205 ventral scales, P. viridissimus has more. P. olfersii has fewer than 120 subcaudal scales, P. aestivus and P. viridissiums have more.

Cheers,

Wolfgang
-----
WW Home

Comparison of my female.

>>Comparison of my female.
>>

Already checked that . Certainly, the shape of the loreal and anterior temporal on your specimen is a lot more like that of P. olfersi than that of the P. aestivus in my photo. Havng said that, I have no idea how stable these characters are within either of these two species.

How sure are you of the length measurement? Is this an estimate or did youa ctually measure your snake?

Cheers,
Wolfgang
-----
WW Home

>>Comparison of my female.
>>

Another thing you should try to check is the number of scale rows around the middle of the body (the middle between the head and the vent). You can do that very easily on a shed.

Cheers,

Wolfgang
-----
WW Home

I agree, looks to be a Philodryas olfersii from northeastern Brazil. They are morphs without brown-black colors and I would say: Its a very BIG snake, here, P.olfersii usually dont get so big. How old is she? I have 2 10month baby that I suppose to be a pair of southeastern morph. They are 65cm now. I'll get a pic of them and their setup soon I can.

Ok.
I ignore age what has. It is about an imported specimen but I don't know from where it comes.
My male to a different muzzle and the line on the scales is very visible.
On the other hand for the female, the line on the scales is invisible. The muzzle is shorter.
She has 7 surlabiales and 9 infralabiales. 90 pairs of under caudal.
After having made some comparisons I lean effectively toward Philodryas olfersii.
I am going to wait again to find more information to confirm. Then I will reform a couple of P. aestivus and a couple of P. olfersii (if it is well that).
That doesn't inconvenience me insofar as all the Philodryas are interested! That will make me a couple besides; -)

Regard, Tom

Here is the body of my male Philodryas aestivus. One sees the lines very well on the scales. The animal measures around 100cm.

Here is the head of my male Philodryas aestivus. No doubt, it is well about P. aestivus!

Voici le corps de la femelle suposé être P. olfersii. Il n'y a pas de ligne sur les écailles ! Donc pas P. aestivus !!

Sorry I had forgotten to write in English; -)

"Here is the body of the female supposed to be P. olfersii. There is not a line on the scales! Therefore not P. aestivus!!"

>>Sorry I had forgotten to write in English; -)

Pas de problème, je te comprends parfaitement

Salutations cordiales,

Wolfgang
-----
WW Home

Moi aussi mais mon francais n'est pas tres tres bien mais je peux comprend beaucoup. Allor si tu veux parler en francias , vas parle francais.

Justin Morash

This is pretty much bigger than I heard they reach. I would say about 110-130cm is a big normal size.

I would have to agree with the identification as P.olfersii. The head looks right for that sp. The examples I had many years ago were of the type with the top of the dorsum brown stained. Didn't know there was a morph lacking that. And there you go, I learned something!

Frank
-----
"The luxury of not getting involved departed with the last lifeboat Skipper..."

Me also I learned something!
Now I know what species it is about!
Therefore, I think if everybody is okay that it is about Philodryas olfersii forms geographical of the north of Brazil.
He remains now more to me that found a female Philodryas aestivus (I know where to find some born in captivity) and to find a male Philodryas olfersii of the same geographical shape that my female (I have horror of the miscellanies!).
I reserved in more for the month of March a couple of Philodryas mattogrossensis magnificent !

Thank you for your help.
Regard, Tom
-------------------------
Moi aussi j'ai appris quelque chose !
Maintenant je sais de quelle espèce il s'agit !
Donc, je pense si tout le monde est d'accord qu'il s'agit de Philodryas olfersii forme géographique du nord du Brésil.
Il ne me reste maintenant plus qu'a trouvé une femelle Philodryas aestivus (je sais où en trouver né en captivité) et trouver un mâle Philodryas olfersii de la même forme géographique que ma femelle (j'ai horreur des mélanges !).
J'ai réservé en plus pour le mois de mars un couple de Philodryas mattogrossensis magnifique !

Merci de votre aide.
@ Tom

I keep P. aestivus, the male is certainly an adult aestivus. Your female I would say is an adult olfersii.

I personally prefer olfersii over aestivus and would love to get my hands on a pair.

Yes, I also think that my two specimens are adult. I like much P. olfersii that is a lot more massif than the aestivus! I hope not to have difficulty finding an identical male...
But what I prefer more again, it is Philodryas baroni. I adore this species!
Regard Tom