Reptile & Amphibian Forums

Hi,

does anyone know anything about the de Schauseei anaconda?
How big do they get?
Does anyone breed them?

if anyone can help me thanx in advance

joe

Nobody breeds them...they get large but not as large as your common greens. They are native to marajo island and research is still being done to find out how far they actually extend. Eunectes deschauenseii is very very rare...perhaps the most rare of all 4 anaconda species. Some believed it is a product of green yellow crossing and that the E. notaeus range is further north than we believe (I am not so sure about that..but possible since the pictures I have seen of it sure do look a lot like the hybrid green x yellows I have seen). Mark O'shea did a specieal on researching this snake but I wonder if things were added for entertainment value. Very interesting animal we know very little about.

E. deschauenseei has been found to reach at least 12 to 13 feet in length and is thought to probably exceed this by several more feet. Is was assumed for some time to be only found on Marajo Island, but is now known to be found inland south and west along the Amazon for almost 300 miles and north through eastern French Guiana almost to Suriname. It is fairly similar to E. notaeus in appearance, but has been proven to be a separate species and not any kind of hybrid as some originally believed. I don't know of any in captivity outside of South America at the current time. It tends to be rather more brown, without the brighter coloration of the green or the yellow anaconda.

Kelly

Kelly, do you know what document and who proved this as a separate species and what information proved that...what is the main differences such as scale counts and other body structural differences and biology

The original description of the type specimen from Marajo Island can be found in:

Dunn,E.R. & Conant,R. 1936
Notes on anacondas, with descriptions of two new species.
Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia 88: 503-506

Dirksen revised the genus in 2002 and updated the species descriptions. The basic differences from the other members of the genus are:

E. deschauenseei differs from murinus by having fewer ventrals and dorsals, no yellow center lateral spots, 5 head stripes instead of 4, and with ocular and supralabial scales in contact (see my beniensis post on Jun. 16).

E. deschauenseei differs from notaeus and beniensis by having intermediate size dark lateral spots, a yellowish-brown ground color, and with the range restriction listed in my previous post.

As can be seen, murinus seems to be the stand-out in the genus with the other three having a more similar morphology.

Kelly

Thank you very much. I remember your post on the row of subocular scales found in murinus that were absent in beniensis. That was my first time seeing anything about beniensis besides that it exists and is native to bolivia. I really appreciate your posts since I looked long and hard to find information on these two (as well as barbouri..which we found was removed from taxonomy with no difference from murinus). My basic gathering was the sizes went from notaeus being the smallest, up to beniensis, then deschauenseii, then finally murinus. Would you agree that this is the general idea from what we have found? I had a very difficult time finding anything that says what we know and much that said we still do not know for sure so I am very happy to have the citations you just posted with the most recent and proven/accepted knowledge. Also, from photos I have seen...deschauenseii looks much lighter in coloration than both murinus and beniensis and beniensis is by far the darkest and most brown. I have also thought notaeus to look the most different especially with the appearance of the head and eyes. Everything else you stated made perfect sense to me and follows what I have observed. If it wouldnt be to much could you comment on this post?

I would agree with your assessment, except that I believe beniensis probably shows more of a green coloration than the typical yellow-brown deschauenseei. As far as sizes, murinus and notaeus are definitely at the two ends of the spectrum. The size data on the other two is very sparse and at present they appear to be relatively similar in this respect.

Kelly

Alright..since the only pictures I was able to find of beniensis was the ones posted in this forum which you identified but the row of subocular scales and the only pictures I saw of deschauenseei were the ones from mark oshea. I thought the one posted in here looked much darker and I tried to get it to load up again to repost but i could only get the head shot. So with wild luck I found this website http://www.anakondas.de/cms/front_content.php?idcat=8 this has pictures of all 4 and is incredible with all the documentation on each...its too bad I cannot read it. But I now see the color and agree with your statement and the picture in here must have just been a dark specimen or the photo. Thank you kelly for the info. Oh, and with the size..the middle 2 were just a relative guess from what I have seen in info on both, the only pictures, and the area found was my guess that descauenseei would be a little bigger than beniensis. But I think beniensis looks more like murinus and deschauenseei looks more like notaeus so I can see how my guess would have nothing to back it in either direction since both evidence contradicts each other and just because one looks more like the other species really has no idication on the small size difference. Thanks again...to anyone else reading this...please look at the site I vut and pasted..its amazing. I just wish I knew what it said..but I can tell it is extensive

amazing, sorry kelly I wasted your time when I could have found everything on this site. WHy couldnt I find this when I researched this for months in the late winter/early spring.

if you do a google search and find the same document..they will translate it from german for you. I love this new technology...why didnt I know about this?

-

Yes, this is Lutz's site. If you are unfamiliar with Lutz's background, he is (thus far) primarily a taxonomist.

He has not (yet) done a much natural history research (field work), so this is why the morphological stats are much more extensive than other details about the species (not unusual, this is the a typical progression of data collection.)

Like Kelly mentioned, there is still almost nothing known about bienensis and deschauenseei, and still a very incomplete database regarding range. As for behavior, and natural history, murinus is the only one as of yet studied extensively in the wild, although I do know a great researcher in the Pantanal - Christine Strussman - who could always use funding and some field hands, she began a research project on notaeus but funding was cut short, and other things (having kids) have delayed her.

Tomas (Waller) and Emilio (Buongermini) are 2 other researchers who have done some field research (with notaeus), in Argentina and Paraguay. Apparently, scientists intended to do some more last year on notaeus distribution
http://www.ecodigital.com.ar/Biodiversidad folder/CuriyuIng.htm

Still waiting to hear details.

Renee