Reptile & Amphibian Forums

Thanks and have fun

Frank.....
To me it looks like an Arizona locale Splendida probably from the southwest close to californiae influence.......

Wasn't the first albino and hypo Splendida found in Arizona?

John Lassiter

Hi John, Thanks for responding, I will explain this quickly as I am off to a local herp show. We, my partner and I, and a few others, including don shores, where leaving my friends restrant on the southwest side of tucson when we found that king on the patio.

The reason I started posting local kings(as we find them) is, they are many different types of kings and they may or may not have influence of other types. This concept is going to be very difficult for you to understand, because you and others only know them as captives and man made names.

These kings do not have Cal king influence, they are indeed splendida derived, but are not splendida. They appear very splendida looking as babies, but will indeed grow up to become nearly all black. This population will attain a very large size for kings in our area, with individuals getting over five feet fairly commonly. There is no indication of cal king influence, there are no calking populations near this population, nor do they exhibit any calking qualities.

To better think about this, the only reason you say calking influence is calkings are to the west and this king is not exactly splendida. You do not use any real evidence that what you say has occured is occurring or occurred in the recent or distant past. You merely state it for no real reason having to do with this snake, you state it with your captive knowledge.

Many of you forget, that a wild snake is a product of two very strong controls, one is genetics(what you understand) the other is far more important, local selection. Selection has direct control over what survives in a local area, selection controls the past and the future of what a snake appears to be. Genetics is a base, not a control. Genetics supports selection and tries to keep up. If it fails to keep up, these populations disappear, if genetics succeeds, that is offers types that succeed, that population stays and progresses. Neither genetics or selection is static, but instead constantly changing.

As a hobbyist, I understand its your only common thread, as a biologist or field monkey, I understand this population is unique and more then likely a morph of its own, derived from splendida and modified by isolation(time and selection)

As a captive kingsnake expert, you only have captive evidence to go by, not the real evidence, that is, the snakes or population itself. When in fact, your comments are meaningless and this snake has all meaning. Please, understand, I do not mean to insinuate that you are bad or unknowledgeable, its merely your wrong by using the wrong set of evidence.

Now to be more accurate, on the other side of the mountains, there are indeed splendida types with Cal king influence(speedwayensis) These animals express not only pattern sharing, but include a direct route of connection. That is, the river basins that allow kingsnakes to dispurse thru our deserts(uninhabitatable habitat)Are in direct contact. Also, 100 years of farming(flood irrigation) has indeed caused artificial recent connections from the northwest of tucson, to the Tucson valley itself. The northwest/calking influence, connects the southern splendida influence, which migrate from the south thru the Santa Cruz river basin.

While that is absolutely in evidence, there are many many outlying disjunct populations that are unique to themselves. I hope you can grasp this concept. I believe its causing many of you confusion when identifying other kingsnake patterns. In other words, they do not have to be intergrades to express different or intermediate patterns. You really need more real evidence, not what it appears by what Osborne or Shore labels them. No offense to those fellas, great fellas they are. They are only examples.

Also one last thought, in the future, you may find thru the use of DNA, that many of these "different appearing kings" may indeed be different and will be discribed as new species. (I will put some coin on this, a bet)

Is any of the above relect or recent, it may indeed be recent due to the above mentioned farming, creatine new pathways and breaking down natural barriers. Or not. Thanks for listening to a veiw from the field side of kingsnakes, FR

Alright, alright Frank.....I was just playing your game.....LOL
It was just a guess.....It 'appears' to be a Splendida with Califorinia influence....That does not mean that it is.....

Maybe years before even you were born the influencial californiae was there.....Ever think about that?
Relict Populations Frank......Now isolated and breeding within themselves for populations.....

If this is not believed then you are indeed a splitter.....
Would you say this snake you picture should be a new species if it was derived from Splendida but is not a Splendida? Then what is it? I guess all the intergrade zones should have their own subspecies name now? Again the ranges of each species could have overlapped long before we even thought about this cool little hobby we got......

I respect your enthusiasm Frank.....And yes I was just guessing as this was "Another name that king, question, type and local" game we we playing.....Not "let's bash the first person who guesses."........LOL

Please explain better why you think your finds ARE some new subspecies and not intergrades.......If this is the case there should be at least 10 new subspecies in the getula complex....

John Lassiter

Hi John, first, I did not say it was only about you, I said, many of you, this and that. As its not you or just you. Its more a way of thinking that concerns me. The truth is, it simply does not matter what you call them. That is, until they are exstint. They are what they are.

The problem lays in, you call them what they appear to be from captive interpitation of the names, not by the evidence of the individual animal or it population and population history. That is, You are using material that has little to do with the animal in question. For instance I include migration pathways, these are very important for understanding how or why species spread. Therefore what is the current animal. They simply do not spread or migrate over uninhabitable habitat.

Also, About the past, these animals are a current form of what they were. That is, they are what they are now, not what they were, they indeed were many things, but fortunately for us, they are not now. hahahahahahaha that is funny. They are never the same as they were.

About me being a splitter, I am not a splitter or a clumper, why would I have to be either? I simply know the history of the population of the animals I showed. This history is far more important to what they are then something like a partial band that reminds you of what someone calls a cal king.

As i mentioned, Its going to get far far more confusing before it becomes clear, as the use of DNA continues. This will happen no matter what I think or want. Or what you think or want. That is my prediction.

About them being different, they are different, the question is how much different? Then how much different do they need to be?

I really don't care about how you think about it. I would hope you enjoy looking at it in another way, if you don't its of no concern to me. It will not make you better or worse. Or will it effect what or how I think about you. Your legancy is the joy of kingsnakes and the pics you show. Thanks and don't be so sensitive, FR

Okay Frank,
I am not going to be sensitive about anything....I just want to say that the getula in my locale must be a new ssp. as well cause neonates from this area have both checkered and black bellies....

Like you said many times before....pattern should have nothing to do with what ssp. it is.......i think that is a crock!!!!.....LOL

With that being stated.....what the heck are the getula I have found in Aransas Co., TX and Nueces Co., TX?????
They sure look like intergrades between Holbrooki and Splendida to me.......I cannot be as bold as you and state that they are a whole different ssp........

Pattern and scale count is all we have to go by except DNA tests.......Maybe some day in the future we will have personal, inexpensive DNA testers.....

Again....I am not being sensitive at all.....I appreciate your input on many things, but I think most of it is just to make me/ some of us think....Nothing you say is absolute.......

John Lassiter

and you put your own words where you want them. For one, I did not state anything. Please read. I suggest possibilities.

For instance, you fellas call individuals intergrades without evidence of intergradation. You forget the major power that controls color(a fast changing genetic trait) its the enviornment selects what succeeds in a particular area, I have stated this over and over again, if you would want to discuss how valid is, then lets discuss that. But you only want to label things but what connection any trait has with a named(one you like) form or subspecies. That is in error. Or at least has a strong possibility of being very wrong.

It seems to me, you would think if someone let a green kingsnake loose in a calking area, there would be lots of green/calking intergrades for many years. How about releasing 100 green kings. The reality is, selection would allow the normal pattern to exsist as it has for decades.

Consider, if this was not so, and your constant intergradation is true, then there would be absolutely no reason for all the different morphs of Getulus. There would only be one dominate color morph, as habitat, would not modify only genetics would be expressed.

I really think you should consider the effects of selection and color morphs. Thanks for the conversation. FR

""For instance, you fellas call individuals intergrades without evidence of intergradation.""

And you Frank call intergrades new species without any evidence of them being so.....

""Consider, if this was not so, and your constant intergradation is true, then there would be absolutely no reason for all the different morphs of Getulus. There would only be one dominate color morph, as habitat, would not modify only genetics would be expressed.""

I never stated there was constant intergration. What I said that there was intergration either relict or occuring at the present.
Now...Who are you to tell me I am wrong....Unless you are Relict.....LOL
And you say "morphs" in Getulus...........There are many morphs in many species of Getula....Don't you mean the different subspecies of Getula.

Have you ever thought that Californiae and Getula getula were the only pure species in the US....and everything in between derived from gene flow of each???? I know that is far fetched, but when I look at Californiae and Holbrooki.....ALL the splendida in between appear to be an intergration of the two......

I still think you believe that there are numerous more kingsnake species within the United States.....Is this true?
And....I know you are "suggesting" most of the time, but many believe in intergration and not intergraded species standing alone as a subspecies..........
John Lassiter

good stuff,,,,,,, lighten up FR ,,,,,,quote ,,,Have you ever thought that Californiae and Getula getula were the only pure species in the US....and everything in between derived from gene flow of each???? ,endquote,,,,,,,ive thought similiarly except i'll take it further and say there is only ONE species and that is lgg with ALL other ssp being derived from that, and what we call ssp. is actually just phenotypicaly pattern variants of that species as it migrated and established itself across this great country,,,,,,,,,,,,
yeah i know imma freek,,,,,thomas davis

I want to play too...

I think the getula radiated up from Mexico much like the proposed radiation of triangulum. I don't have any evidence to support my theory, and haven't researched it either, but it seems to make sense to me.

I'll see what I can find on it, I seem to remember some genetic work suggesting this possibilty but off the top of my head I'm not sure if I read it or dreamed it up myself.

Forky

wish we ALL could/would/want to play,,,,,,,
pretty intersting theory they(getula)cameup thru mexico certainly is plausible/possible its my opinion they came from the east but i also have no real evidence to back that up with however i do beleive all getula are the same and what we call ssp. are infact just pattern variants, guess im just outside the box in that thinkin,oilwell,its a lonely road thats less traveled 4sure,,,,,,thomas

I did read it here:

Molecular systematics of New World
lampropeltinine snakes (Colubridae):
implications for biogeography and evolution of
food habits
JAVIER A. RODRI´GUEZ-ROBLES*
Museum of Vertebrate Zoology and Department of Integrative Biology, University of California,
Berkeley, CA 94720-3160, U.S.A.
JOSE´ M. DE JESU´ S-ESCOBAR
Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, Division of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology,
University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720-3204, U.S.A.
Received 22 June 1998; accepted for publication 4 January 1999

STUFF there thanks for postin it,,,maybe the road aint so lonely after all,,,,,,,,thomas

yeah the road is that lonely ;(
,i sure was hoping some others would show some levity and join in this conversation,but there is a part of me that see's why just the suggestion of dismissing all ssp of getula as pattern variants of one species,, how absurd!,,,,its kinda like the govt.we must confuse we must confuse&nitpick we must create rhetorical nonsense,we must create redtape,it cannot be that simple we must create a gateway for prejudice & hate,,,,,,ok sorry for the rant im done now,,,,,,thomas

and if not, we can talk about those callies....

DID YOU KNOW...... that when you step across the county line there into Guadalupe county, calligaster would be a new county record? Now I know plenty have been found there, but it seems no one bothered to make it official and document the find and deposit a specimen into a museum. (as far as I can tell by Dixon, and Dixon and Werler, and Tennant).

So I'll fix that next month.

Forks

no they a feared to play,,,yeah thats odd on calligaster i thought All counties from bexar up had calli's recognized in them. that is pretty weird nobody has recorded them in guadalupe county if i remember correctly(its been 20yrs since ive stomped guadalupe co.)prariekings wernt real common in guadalupe co. but by no means impossible to find i used to get lots of desertkings,coralsnakes,mexmilks,coachwhips,atrox quite easily in guadalupe co. im planning on atrip to bexar and surrounding counties in feb. i still got friends and family all around there and i miss all the herps only differance in flippin there and here in houston is scorpions! i gotta remember gloves this time last time took 4stings first day;P it is cool in houston there are no scorpions im def. lookin foward to a febuary stomp thru the mesquite shrub of southcentral,,do ya know if the old rock tower lookout is still on judson rd.? man back the early 80's that was THE place to hangout also not bad for rdhuntin up and along 1604 side,side roadsbest mex.food in the world is in universalcity LA'Fiesta patio cafe ohhh yeah great family owned rest.,,,,,well good luck on the calligaster best hurry cuz i will get some in feb. forsure,,,,,,thomas

and where in Guadalupe county did you finds Milks? Better not answer that one on the forum....

So you're giving me 4 months head start on the Guadalupe county calli? hmmmm 4 years might not be enough, we'll see

Forky

i only found milks rd.huntin which i hate because of dors but they there,,,,yep 4months ill be over there stompin in febuary if all goes right,,,,,,,,,,,thomas

OK Joe, but I got dibs on bringing the record back from Phil in Kentucky to where it belongs! LOL! Your cell is kicking back to mailbox. I'm in for out west, 361-813-3669
Todd

I would have joined in before, but just didn't have the time to respond. I don't think I can do this subject justice in one or two sentences, so here I go being long winded again, heheh!

First, let me say that it was a rant, Thomas. Gee! No subspecies, where have I heard that before? hahahaha. So you think we're trying to confuse and nitpick and create a gateway for prejudice and hate. LOL...I haven't been that tense in a long time. I must not be working hard enough

Actually, if you read my posts on some of the strands below, you saw that I think there are some weak subspecies (ssps). I think splendida is a good ssps, but nigrita seems to be a splendida in disguise. John L, Frank, and I agreed on one thing, haha.

I don't know that much about holbrooki and have never collected in their range. But I feel that holbrooki is a weak ssps too. They just blend in with splendida easily and seem too much like nigra. Could combine a couple ssps here, I think.

Let me put this proposition to ya'. If there were just californiae (on the west coast) and getula (on the east coast) and all the other ssps inbetween suddenly and mysteriously disappeared, what would you think about these two ssps (californiae and getula)? I would just about guarantee you that the scientific world would immediately start writing papers explaining how different they are and how they should be split into two distinct species. My guess is the dna work would collaborate this.

Don't get me wrong. I like subspecies. I just think they should be good ssps. In other words, I think they should have enough range that a distinct and prevailing form should stand out at the center of that subspecies. A ssps will always start to change its form near the periphery of its range, as Frank said, because of the ecological conditions working on it. It will respond to the changing environment. To have a good ssps. you need to have a good size environment in which conditions do not change enough to change the basic form.

Look at splendida. What environment does it thrive in? Splendida is basically a desert grassland form, imo. Where it starts to intergrade with holbrooki, or have some holbrooki characters, however you put it, is where the environment begins to change to open woodland, tall grass, and generally more mesic, more humid climate. Make sense? These changes are very gradual as you move eastward towards the Appalachian Mtns. Once you start to get very wooded and start to get higher elevations, you start to get melanistic forms, nigra. This was part of Frank's reasoning which I never disagreed with.

I think californiae and getula are the best ssps, but I like splendida too. I might put holbrooki and nigra together in one ssps, if it were up to me. I agree it's very confusing because the changes are so gradual. It's better than no ssps., imo. I work with one ratsnake (dione) that has the largest range of any ratsnake worldwide, and there are no ssps. Talk about frustrating. All you can do then is to have color/pattern morphs in the hobby.

Let's face it, the hobby is intricately linked with science and the natural world, but has it's own ways of doing things

TC

COOL!! well,,,,,,,,,lets seee

I would have joined in before, but just didn't have the time to respond. I don't think I can do this subject justice in one or two sentences, so here I go being long winded again, heheh!

First, let me say that it was a rant, Thomas. Gee! No subspecies, where have I heard that before? hahahaha. So you think we're trying to confuse and nitpick and create a gateway for prejudice and hate. LOL...I haven't been that tense in a long time. I must not be working hard enough

yeah i guess i am TENSE, maybe im workin to hard!

Actually, if you read my posts on some of the strands below, you saw that I think there are some weak subspecies (ssps). I think splendida is a good ssps, but nigrita seems to be a splendida in disguise. John L, Frank, and I agreed on one thing, haha.

nigrita IS splendida imho just as holbrooki IS nigra imho

I don't know that much about holbrooki and have never collected in their range. But I feel that holbrooki is a weak ssps too. They just blend in with splendida easily and seem too much like nigra. Could combine a couple ssps here, I think.

for sure!

Let me put this proposition to ya'. If there were just californiae (on the west coast) and getula (on the east coast) and all the other ssps inbetween suddenly and mysteriously disappeared, what would you think about these two ssps (californiae and getula)? I would just about guarantee you that the scientific world would immediately start writing papers explaining how different they are and how they should be split into two distinct species. My guess is the dna work would collaborate this.

hmmmm if there was a gap that large between them i would probably consider them ssp of 1 species, but thats where it becomes fantasy as the fact is ALL getula range into NA and what i am saying is they are/could be the same species and what we are calling ssp are actually just color variants of the same creature

Don't get me wrong. I like subspecies. I just think they should be good ssps. In other words, I think they should have enough range that a distinct and prevailing form should stand out at the center of that subspecies. A ssps will always start to change its form near the periphery of its range, as Frank said, because of the ecological conditions working on it. It will respond to the changing environment. To have a good ssps. you need to have a good size environment in which conditions do not change enough to change the basic form.

TRUE'DAT

Look at splendida. What environment does it thrive in? Splendida is basically a desert grassland form, imo. Where it starts to intergrade with holbrooki, or have some holbrooki characters, however you put it, is where the environment begins to change to open woodland, tall grass, and generally more mesic, more humid climate. Make sense? These changes are very gradual as you move eastward towards the Appalachian Mtns. Once you start to get very wooded and start to get higher elevations, you start to get melanistic forms, nigra. This was part of Frank's reasoning which I never disagreed with.

well thats good makes very basic sense

I think californiae and getula are the best ssps, but I like splendida too. I might put holbrooki and nigra together in one ssps, if it were up to me. I agree it's very confusing because the changes are so gradual. It's better than no ssps., imo. I work with one ratsnake (dione) that has the largest range of any ratsnake worldwide, and there are no ssps. Talk about frustrating. All you can do then is to have color/pattern morphs in the hobby.

yeah i guess no ssp. it would be boring thus the creation of them,,,,

Let's face it, the hobby is intricately linked with science and the natural world, but has it's own ways of doing things

TC

agreed,but also acknowledged is that there is book knowledge and hands on knowledge and i acknowledge what i beleive and thats hands on baby!
,,,,,,,,thomas

splendida probably is the sub that thrives in the most diverse habtitats from Montane Grasslands, Tamaulipan thorn scrub, Chihuahuan Desert, and Suburban creeks and fields around San Antonio (different enough niche to ID but don't have a name for it), down to the Montane Nuevo Laredo (again just different enough to note), and finally the Sonoran Desert.

I don't think any other sub of getula occupies that many niches

Question. Does that in itself mean anything besides the obvious?

Forky

>>splendida probably is the sub that thrives in the most diverse habtitats from Montane Grasslands, Tamaulipan thorn scrub, Chihuahuan Desert, and Suburban creeks and fields around San Antonio (different enough niche to ID but don't have a name for it), down to the Montane Nuevo Laredo (again just different enough to note), and finally the Sonoran Desert.
>>
>>I don't think any other sub of getula occupies that many niches
>>
>>Question. Does that in itself mean anything besides the obvious?
>>
>>Forky

I fear no snakes or games...err, maybe atrox and rugby! I'll play, game on! I like splendida as the dominant king where they all came from! It also occupies the dunes along the coast of Texas down south, albeit losing the sockhead. Add that to the diversity of habitat. I bet dna isn't gonna split it from the western locals either. The snake does the same thing here as it does there, and aren't there sand dunes in west Texas also? I hear tell of Mule deer that live in them dunes! Snakes find a humid hole and shack up during the day and come out early and late. No experience with calkings or easterns, just calli-g's, splendida, and holbrooki. Wether or not specks are a valid ssp., I LIKE 'EM! I would hope that centrally into their range they would differ enough for subspeciation. Notice I said hope. Nigras are awfully big, but could be big specks! And easterns? Well I would say they are all probably getula getula, just color variations. All in all, splendida coming up from Mexico sounds pretty plausible. I'm just glad they are all different enough to drive forums like this! Game off!
Todd Hughes

>>splendida probably is the sub that thrives in the most diverse habtitats from Montane Grasslands, Tamaulipan thorn scrub, Chihuahuan Desert, and Suburban creeks and fields around San Antonio (different enough niche to ID but don't have a name for it), down to the Montane Nuevo Laredo (again just different enough to note), and finally the Sonoran Desert.
>>
>>I don't think any other sub of getula occupies that many niches
>>
>>Question. Does that in itself mean anything besides the obvious?
>>
>>Forky

What I think is that it boils down to what habitat a form is best adapted to, but not only habitat, also climatic conditions, etc. Splendida thrives in a bunch of different niches, but there's undoubtedly some connecting threads about those niches. One variable is that their niches seem to all be semi-arid, xeric type habitats. Their niches also seem to be sparsely vegetated. Compare that to the getula species as a whole and you can see it narrows them down a little. There's still things they have in common with the other subs though.

To reiterate, it's all one species, and the ssps are basically color/pattern variations within the species, along with other minor variability, such as size, etc.

TC

Not to split hairs, but I think you are over simplifying the niches a little. There is easily double the difference in annual rainfall between the most xeric and mesic niches splendida fills.

A brief synopsis of the biomes include short grass prairie and tall grass prairie, as well as montane vegetation (grassland), cool shrub desert, and warm shrub desert.

Only reason I nit pick here is because this is exactly the point I was trying to make. Huge difference in the niches, all of which I am intimately familiar with.

Forky

>>What I think is that it boils down to what habitat a form is best adapted to, but not only habitat, also climatic conditions, etc. Splendida thrives in a bunch of different niches, but there's undoubtedly some connecting threads about those niches. One variable is that their niches seem to all be semi-arid, xeric type habitats. Their niches also seem to be sparsely vegetated. Compare that to the getula species as a whole and you can see it narrows them down a little. There's still things they have in common with the other subs though.
>>
>>To reiterate, it's all one species, and the ssps are basically color/pattern variations within the species, along with other minor variability, such as size, etc.
>>
>>TC
>>
>>

Thanks Thomas....I have believed this for as long as I have been into kingsnakes. It is amazing that from the west to the east there are so many similar looks in getula....colors and patterns.

I think that is why I like thayeri so much......No two are alike......LOL

John Lassiter

>> Also one last thought, in the future, you may find thru the use of DNA, that many of these "different appearing kings" may indeed be different and will be discribed as new species. (I will put some coin on this, a bet)
>>

I would take this bet, except that it's very possible that Collins, et al, will start describing new species in the getula group, because they don't like subspecies and they will separate new species based on very little genetic variation. But I'll argue til my dying day that what you have is not only a getula, but is also a splendida, probably with some influence from one or more other subspecies.

Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed your discussion here, and you put forth some interesting and accurate info. However, I believe your snake is not different enough to warrant a new subspecies designation, let alone a new species. And how can you think that, if you haven't done any research yourself other than finding the snake on a porch?

It just so happens that I've done a little field work myself, and I happen to spend a little time every year in the Santa Cruz Valley, not far from s. Tucson. I've found around twenty, or so, kings that vary from typical splendida to typical nigrita. I believe that these are splendida with nigrita influence and that what you have are probably from the same population, although I'm not sure if you're saying your example is from the Santa Cruz River Valley.

I have also found that the young are typically the color/pattern of splendida and get darker with age. As I said, I've seen adults that are almost all black and some that look like splendida, with some inbetween. I've also seen a couple from Mexico that have the splendida pattern and some that are nearly all black. Remember, the hobby has bred for the all black color for years...selection

You also mentioned that you've seen them about five ft. long. I can't say I've seen any that large, probably four ft. being my largest. Isn't it possible that some californiae influence could be spreading down the Santa Cruz Valley from the northwest? That might account for the larger size. The snake you pictured doesn't look like it has any cal influence, however, except the light bands are slightly larger than normal for splendida.

Remember, everything I've mentioned is based on my meager experience, and is just my opinion, except when noted. I would remind folks that these are just conjectures, and that's how I see your information too, Frank. I do appreciate your insights too, and hope you keep it up. I love seeing wild caught specimens, especially with locality data. Hope to see you in the field sometime.

Terry

Yes Terry, but I think Nigrita are just melanistic Splendida...The melanism is shown in varying degrees throughout its range.

Intergration does occur....Whether it happened years ago or is presently occuring is the question. Some things happened well before we were out hunting snakes.

Take for example the Appalachicola Kings, the Penninsular intergrade kings, the Outer banks kings and the Edisto Island kings........All intergrades, but some intergraded years ago and became isolated.

If Frank says there is no Calking populations anywhere near this one he found....Maybe at one time there was...this would account for the lack of speckling, cleaner bands and larger sizes.....

I do some field work myself, but never in Arizona...I do have a wife and 4 kids and stay close to home.......

John Lassiter

I tend to agree with what you're saying here. I just hope I didn't misinterpret what Frank was saying. From his earlier post...

Now to be more accurate, on the other side of the mountains, there are indeed splendida types with Cal king influence(speedwayensis) These animals express not only pattern sharing, but include a direct route of connection. That is, the river basins that allow kingsnakes to dispurse thru our deserts(uninhabitatable habitat)Are in direct contact. Also, 100 years of farming(flood irrigation) has indeed caused artificial recent connections from the northwest of tucson, to the Tucson valley itself. The northwest/calking influence, connects the southern splendida influence, which migrate from the south thru the Santa Cruz river basin.

While that is absolutely in evidence, there are many many outlying disjunct populations that are unique to themselves. I hope you can grasp this concept. I believe its causing many of you confusion when identifying other kingsnake patterns. In other words, they do not have to be intergrades to express different or intermediate patterns. You really need more real evidence, not what it appears by what Osborne or Shore labels them. No offense to those fellas, great fellas they are. They are only examples.

At first I thought he was saying that sw. Tucson was in the Santa Cruz River Valley, but now I'm not sure. Maybe he meant his speciman was from west of the Tucson Mtns, which is not in the limits of Tucson, btw. In the quote above Frank is saying that the snakes in the Santa Cruz River Valley, which runs from Nogales, Mex, up through sw. and west Tucson, have influence from splendida of the south and californiae from the northwest. In other words, these are intergrades in the Tucson Valley. If the speciman Frank used is from west of the Tucson Mtns, I have no idea what's going on over there. They could very well be isolated.

But this is what I think of the snake. After your latest comments, John, I looked at the Frank's snake again. Then I looked at this juvenile (see photo) I found this summer, dor, in Green Valley. I see the differences you're pointing out. The blotching isn't the same, speckling is different a little, light bands are slightly different. I agree that Frank's looks like it has some cal king influence. I also understand what you're saying, that the intergradation could have happened in the past, even if the pop. is isolated now. I think it would take genetic testing, as Frank suggested, to say whether it's an intergrade, or different enough to call a new subspecies or species.

Please note that my original comments only applied to snakes in the Santa Cruz River Valley.

Terry

>>Yes Terry, but I think Nigrita are just melanistic Splendida...The melanism is shown in varying degrees throughout its range.
>>

I think this also, but in the literature, nigrita is currently seen as a valid ssps.

>>Intergration does occur....Whether it happened years ago or is presently occuring is the question. Some things happened well before we were out hunting snakes.
>>
>>Take for example the Appalachicola Kings, the Penninsular intergrade kings, the Outer banks kings and the Edisto Island kings........All intergrades, but some intergraded years ago and became isolated.
>>
>>If Frank says there is no Calking populations anywhere near this one he found....Maybe at one time there was...this would account for the lack of speckling, cleaner bands and larger sizes.....
>>

This sounds quite true, but remember that we need to test each isolated pop. to see how closely related they are. Each one is unique and could possibly be just the closest subs, a new subs, or even a new species. I look to the literature as to what to call each snake.

>>I do some field work myself, but never in Arizona...I do have a wife and 4 kids and stay close to home.......
>>
>>John Lassiter

You're a better man than me, haha. It's all I can do to deal with two grown daughters (love them both).

PS: A photo of the dor juve splendida from G.V. this summer.

TC

I love that snake, Terry! Too bad, go get me some!
Todd Hughes

You have no idea what your talking about, hahahahahahaha, 20 or so specimens from a totally different local. That sir, does not make sense.

I could throw large numbers at you, but I will give you an idea. I live here, I have hunted here, since 1967, I have seen hundreds if not more from each of many many many different locals within this area.

Also, the black kings along the border are splendida, they hatch out of the same clutches as the splendida types, so it would be difficult to say they are a different subspecies. But thanks for the input. I do hope your dying day is a long way off, because this subject is not that important, as I say, they are what they are, no matter what we call them. Cheers FR

>>You have no idea what your talking about, hahahahahahaha, 20 or so specimens from a totally different local. That sir, does not make sense.
>>

Thanks for the vote of confidence. I meant no offense by my remarks. I only want to discuss with you because it seems you're trying to figure out what to call these kings and how they interact, as I am. BTW, I've been looking at the kings from the Santa Cruz River Valley for about four years, at least, and I've seen my twenty and dozens from other herpers in the area. Also I've listened to all their arguments and comments. I know that there are similarities in the getula from Nogales to Tucson and that it is an intergrade area, thought to be a three way intergrade area by most, including Stebbins from his field guide. I could include several important herpetologists, but thought you would consider just my ideas, because they do make sense, to me, LOL. Also, my base location, where I live parttime, is only about twenty miles south of Tucson, and I have herped all over the area. I just haven't spent much time in Tucson itself. I do appreciate the pictures you've showed and your insights. Thanks again.

>> I could throw large numbers at you, but I will give you an idea. I live here, I have hunted here, since 1967, I have seen hundreds if not more from each of many many many different locals within this area.
>>

I'm not doubting what you've seen. Some of the areas I've hunted snakes in go back to the 50's. I'm just saying that the kingsnakes I'm seeing are in the Santa Cruz River Valley, as I thought yours were, and I think I understand what's happening there and what those snakes are. That's what I thought we were discussing up til a point. Did you read my second post, addressed to Lassiter? After I made that first post to you I started thinking you were talking about a different locale, somewhere west or sw. of Tucson. You said sw. Tucson before. Maybe we need to make the location more exact, or are you trying to avoid that?

>> Also, the black kings along the border are splendida, they hatch out of the same clutches as the splendida types, so it would be difficult to say they are a different subspecies. But thanks for the input. I do hope your dying day is a long way off, because this subject is not that important, as I say, they are what they are, no matter what we call them. Cheers FR

Thanks. I'm glad you said that. I think those along the border are splendida too. Did you know that they were up for listing as a protected subspecies by Game and Fish last year? Obviously, many of the state's herpetologists think they are nigrita and they need protecting. That's a good one, eh??

I hope my dying day is a long way off to, because I want to enjoy my retirement in AZ. I agree they are what they are, but it is important to me, because it's one of my favorite species to work with, and I am very interested in the classification of the kings, as well as other aspects about them. Sorry if I caused you any concern, and thanks for the strand. I learned a lot, my whole point. I do wish I knew more about some of your locations, however. Cheers, and good luck in the future

TC

First you need to understand their task, to conserve and protect the fauna of the state of Arizona for the use of the people of arizona. Thier charges are the property of the people of arizona.

There are two very real conditions to this, one is the fact that its an impossible task. That is, they cannot do their job, they cannot stop the advancement of civilization. Farming, mining and housing will always win over a state agency.

So, all they can do is create avenues of success, that is, they protect animals to show they are doing their job. Protecting animals that are not in need of current protection is far more successful then protecting an animal about to go under the blade of a bulldozer. The reality is, sooner or later, they will be next in line to need real protection. The species that are safe now, well be safe far longer then those loosing the battle now. So they have shown success.

My concern has been they should only protect what needs protection. That way, they would have more resources to work with. But as time goes by, I have realized, there is not enough money to stop the blade, its all smoke and mirrors. In other words, conservation is telling you to look over there, while what is over here goes exstint. There is not stopping that, yet.

Anyway, you better hurry and retire, as green valley is no longer green, it will soon have a name change to asphalt valley. Sorry, cheers FR

>> My concern has been they should only protect what needs protection. That way, they would have more resources to work with. But as time goes by, I have realized, there is not enough money to stop the blade, its all smoke and mirrors. In other words, conservation is telling you to look over there, while what is over here goes exstint. There is not stopping that, yet.
>>
>> Anyway, you better hurry and retire, as green valley is no longer green, it will soon have a name change to asphalt valley. Sorry, cheers FR

Conservation is a tough job for sure. Here in MI it is a loosing battle, except for the fact that we do try to save some habitat and create some preserves. That's hard to do though, when progress demands more land in the neighborhood of where you're trying to save land. Trying to save it for herps is even harder than trying to save it for furry animals, or even fish, etc. That's why I look at everything, including the plants, when I'm studying an area.

What's happening to Green Valley is happening all over. It's sad. I like to think we're helping the situation, not adding to the problem. We bought a used house, not a new one. But it is sad what's happening. Prospects for the future don't look very green for anyone. I hope to help with the conservation effort in my retirement. Where is Goanna Ranch? Do you live very close to Tucson?

TC

I would have gone with, splendida from Tucson.
Interesting that you're looking at these guys as their own population/ subspecies with no recent Cal influence - I'm not gonna argue that, as you've live there forever & I haven't collected there in about twenty years.
I came to a similar conclusion when I moved to the Dallas area.
They call the getula there a holbrooki x splendida intergrade (they cover a huge area of the range map, by the way).
Personally, they seem like their own ssp. to me - they exibit a color pattern similar to both, but (& I hate to say this about any getula) they are a crappy little kingsnake that doesn't compare with either a nice splendida or holbrooki. They don't get as large as either, have a different morpology, tend to be more fossorial, & have sh!tty attitudes/personalities. They are their own snake , as Frank says, & don't need us to approve, disaprove, or catagorize them.
Anyways, this seemed like a good place to put those comments...
Cheers, Max
-----
"I may be crazy, but ya know... I can rationalize just about anything."

Another splendida from your ranch is my guess! Nice abberencies, if there are any abberencies in kingsnakes! Are there many of that locality? Maybe from south of the border?
Todd Hughes

but I'll say what I thought anyway.

Splendida from SW Tucson.

Oh, how large is that snake? A yearling?

Forks

FR, Tucson area has a fascinating array of getua sp., one of which you showed. I would love to see an adult, the dark form you mentioned. You often mention how polymorphic Lampropeltis tends to be, is the "restaurantt" king in the photo typical of the very local population? i.e. would its siblings look similar or some be dark,etc.? A photo gallery of Tucson area L.getula would be fun to see... Thanks for posting, I enjoy these "name the local/morphs" games.

...to a few of the pix I've posted recently for your viewing pleasure

Terry
ratsnakehaven's gallery

Ok,ok - just kiddin'. (Sorry I'm not so much into western stuff anymore)
Left my home of California in 83'.

Zee