Reptile & Amphibian Forums

Hi guys

I'm not usually a ratsnake kind of guy, but I thought I'd show this one off to you aficionados of all things ratsnake.

Anybody else here have any experience with these? So far they've been brain-dead-easy to take care of. Just looking for thoughts that you guys might have.

Doug T

Not a ratsnake but a very cool snake. That's the one with the nose appendage? Is it a rear fang?

Best regards
John

It has an elongated nose, but I wouldn't quite call it an appendage.

I ask this out of true ignorance... what qualifies a snake as a "ratsnake"? I assumed that ratsnake moniker was simply a common name and made for some nice cross-over interest with the rear-fanged crowd.

Doug T

>>Not a ratsnake but a very cool snake. That's the one with the nose appendage? Is it a rear fang?
>>
>>Best regards
>>John
>>
>>

Fair question. The taxonomists have been shifting the criteria lately in favor of DNA similarity. Formerly, body shape, scalation and life history were probably the most important indicators. Ratsnakes typically tended to a breadbox cross-section (U-shaped dorsal and lateral with a flat ventral), arboreal lifestyle, strong constriction and warm blooded prey for adults.

That being said, snakes as dissimilar as mandarins, helena and rufodorsatus (a live-bearer for goodness sake!) have at one time or another been considered ratsnakes (Elaphe and kin). There are a number of recent studies based mostly on mtDNA evidence that have reconfigured the family tree of ratsnakes and their closer cousins. If you're intersted I could post some references.
Best regards
John

>>It has an elongated nose, but I wouldn't quite call it an appendage.
>>
>>I ask this out of true ignorance... what qualifies a snake as a "ratsnake"? I assumed that ratsnake moniker was simply a common name and made for some nice cross-over interest with the rear-fanged crowd.
>>
>>Doug T
>>
>>
>>>>Not a ratsnake but a very cool snake. That's the one with the nose appendage? Is it a rear fang?
>>>>
>>>>Best regards
>>>>John
>>>>
>>>>

John, that's a great response to a very interesting question.

I see two possible responses...1. a "ratsnake" according to the taxonomic relationship to the old genus "Elaphe", our N.A. ratsnakes, plus the Eurasians, or...2. a "ratsnake" in very generic terms, because it fits a general description of a snake that looks like a ratsnake, behaves like a ratsnake, etc.

I'm not pretending to be the expert or anything, I just think it's a great question, and can't believe we haven't dealt with it before. We were just talking about the Pampas "ratsnake" a bit ago, and I suggested a possible relationship with Asian ratsnakes (specifically Rynchophis). Although there's probably no taxonomic relationship, there obviously is a physical resemblance. Should we call a snake that looks like a ratsnake, a "ratsnake?"

Haha, hope I didn't ruin your morning. I can't even stay around very long as we're going out of town later. IMO, I think we should allow snakes, like the Pampas ratsnake, to be discussed on the ratsnake forum. It's very interesting that it is a rear-fanged snake, thus venomous. But then, there are some "technically" venomous ratsnakes in Southeast Asia, also.

Thanks for listening...Terry

>>Fair question. The taxonomists have been shifting the criteria lately in favor of DNA similarity. Formerly, body shape, scalation and life history were probably the most important indicators. Ratsnakes typically tended to a breadbox cross-section (U-shaped dorsal and lateral with a flat ventral), arboreal lifestyle, strong constriction and warm blooded prey for adults.
>>
>>That being said, snakes as dissimilar as mandarins, helena and rufodorsatus (a live-bearer for goodness sake!) have at one time or another been considered ratsnakes (Elaphe and kin). There are a number of recent studies based mostly on mtDNA evidence that have reconfigured the family tree of ratsnakes and their closer cousins. If you're intersted I could post some references.
>>Best regards
>>John
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>It has an elongated nose, but I wouldn't quite call it an appendage.
>>>>
>>>>I ask this out of true ignorance... what qualifies a snake as a "ratsnake"? I assumed that ratsnake moniker was simply a common name and made for some nice cross-over interest with the rear-fanged crowd.
>>>>
>>>>Doug T
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>Not a ratsnake but a very cool snake. That's the one with the nose appendage? Is it a rear fang?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Best regards
>>>>>>John
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>
>>

Terry, as far as I'm concerned, if Harry the Hobbyist and Tim the Taxonomist want to define ratsnakes differently then let them. My personal opinion is that there's a smaller difference between elaphe and radiata than there is between elaphe and rear-fangeds. A detectable but minor amount of venom without a delivery system is in a different class from an animal that has venom and a functioning delivery system like the rear-fangeds. I'd throw rear-fangeds out of the ratsnake boat.

But that's just me. Last time I looked none of my degrees were in taxonomy.

So to paraphrase Blazing Saddles "we'll take your Gonyosoma and Spilotes but no Philodryas!! Ah hell, you can all join in!"

>>John, that's a great response to a very interesting question.
>>
>>I see two possible responses...1. a "ratsnake" according to the taxonomic relationship to the old genus "Elaphe", our N.A. ratsnakes, plus the Eurasians, or...2. a "ratsnake" in very generic terms, because it fits a general description of a snake that looks like a ratsnake, behaves like a ratsnake, etc.
>>
>>I'm not pretending to be the expert or anything, I just think it's a great question, and can't believe we haven't dealt with it before. We were just talking about the Pampas "ratsnake" a bit ago, and I suggested a possible relationship with Asian ratsnakes (specifically Rynchophis). Although there's probably no taxonomic relationship, there obviously is a physical resemblance. Should we call a snake that looks like a ratsnake, a "ratsnake?"
>>
>>Haha, hope I didn't ruin your morning. I can't even stay around very long as we're going out of town later. IMO, I think we should allow snakes, like the Pampas ratsnake, to be discussed on the ratsnake forum. It's very interesting that it is a rear-fanged snake, thus venomous. But then, there are some "technically" venomous ratsnakes in Southeast Asia, also.
>>
>>Thanks for listening...Terry
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>Fair question. The taxonomists have been shifting the criteria lately in favor of DNA similarity. Formerly, body shape, scalation and life history were probably the most important indicators. Ratsnakes typically tended to a breadbox cross-section (U-shaped dorsal and lateral with a flat ventral), arboreal lifestyle, strong constriction and warm blooded prey for adults.
>>>>
>>>>That being said, snakes as dissimilar as mandarins, helena and rufodorsatus (a live-bearer for goodness sake!) have at one time or another been considered ratsnakes (Elaphe and kin). There are a number of recent studies based mostly on mtDNA evidence that have reconfigured the family tree of ratsnakes and their closer cousins. If you're intersted I could post some references.
>>>>Best regards
>>>>John
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>It has an elongated nose, but I wouldn't quite call it an appendage.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I ask this out of true ignorance... what qualifies a snake as a "ratsnake"? I assumed that ratsnake moniker was simply a common name and made for some nice cross-over interest with the rear-fanged crowd.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Doug T
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Not a ratsnake but a very cool snake. That's the one with the nose appendage? Is it a rear fang?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Best regards
>>>>>>>>John
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>

Maybe next time you check, your degree will be in taxonomy (if you are very lucky).

I agree with you on your post, but I also believe that many rat snake fans (myself included) are also fans of Philodryas. Posts in the rear fang forum don't generate this much volume, so to get such a fabulous snake into the spotlight, the closest related higher volume forum could be used, IMO. I for one am glad to stumble upon the pics here, but I wouldn't consider them ratsnakes myself.
-----
"I'll be back at 6 if not 7. 8 the very latest but definatly no later than 9...ish...Moscow time."

I did a little surfing to see what the Philodryas seemed like. One thing I didn't read about was any use of constriction. If anyone happens to know about that I'd be interested in knowing it.

Based on what I've seen and heard of taxonomy it wouldn't suit me. In my next career I think I'd prefer to be a double-nought secret agent like my idol Jethro Bodine. Now that looks like fun.

Regards
John

LOL...that's great, John. Not easy to put these kinds of things into perspective. Taxonomically, I'm not sure Philodryas is even a colubrid. I suspect it might be a Xenodontine, as most rearfangs from S. A. have been classified in that group. But then I'm no taxonomist and can only go by what someone else says. I gotta kinda lean towards Harry the Hobbyist and say, if it looks like a ratsnake, behaves like a ratsnake, and has enough similarities to talk about it, then I'm game for including it in some discussion here. Just my meager opinion.

I'm not sure, but I think there are some rear-fanged snakes included in the Colubridae, but I know the Elaphe, at least the ones included in Schulz' book ('96), didn't include any rearfangs. That's not to say that some ratsnakes couldn't have come from rearfanged snakes; but certainly today's Elaphe are highly evolved and lack some of the adaptations of the ancients.

I'm just intrigued by these S. A. snakes that seem to have some characteristics of ratsnakes. Some ratsnake hobbyist should get one and look it over better and make some comparisons.

Hope my tangent thoughts weren't too boring. Later...TC

>>Terry, as far as I'm concerned, if Harry the Hobbyist and Tim the Taxonomist want to define ratsnakes differently then let them. My personal opinion is that there's a smaller difference between elaphe and radiata than there is between elaphe and rear-fangeds. A detectable but minor amount of venom without a delivery system is in a different class from an animal that has venom and a functioning delivery system like the rear-fangeds. I'd throw rear-fangeds out of the ratsnake boat.
>>
>>But that's just me. Last time I looked none of my degrees were in taxonomy.
>>
>>So to paraphrase Blazing Saddles "we'll take your Gonyosoma and Spilotes but no Philodryas!! Ah hell, you can all join in!"
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>John, that's a great response to a very interesting question.
>>>>
>>>>I see two possible responses...1. a "ratsnake" according to the taxonomic relationship to the old genus "Elaphe", our N.A. ratsnakes, plus the Eurasians, or...2. a "ratsnake" in very generic terms, because it fits a general description of a snake that looks like a ratsnake, behaves like a ratsnake, etc.
>>>>
>>>>I'm not pretending to be the expert or anything, I just think it's a great question, and can't believe we haven't dealt with it before. We were just talking about the Pampas "ratsnake" a bit ago, and I suggested a possible relationship with Asian ratsnakes (specifically Rynchophis). Although there's probably no taxonomic relationship, there obviously is a physical resemblance. Should we call a snake that looks like a ratsnake, a "ratsnake?"
>>>>
>>>>Haha, hope I didn't ruin your morning. I can't even stay around very long as we're going out of town later. IMO, I think we should allow snakes, like the Pampas ratsnake, to be discussed on the ratsnake forum. It's very interesting that it is a rear-fanged snake, thus venomous. But then, there are some "technically" venomous ratsnakes in Southeast Asia, also.
>>>>
>>>>Thanks for listening...Terry
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>Fair question. The taxonomists have been shifting the criteria lately in favor of DNA similarity. Formerly, body shape, scalation and life history were probably the most important indicators. Ratsnakes typically tended to a breadbox cross-section (U-shaped dorsal and lateral with a flat ventral), arboreal lifestyle, strong constriction and warm blooded prey for adults.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>That being said, snakes as dissimilar as mandarins, helena and rufodorsatus (a live-bearer for goodness sake!) have at one time or another been considered ratsnakes (Elaphe and kin). There are a number of recent studies based mostly on mtDNA evidence that have reconfigured the family tree of ratsnakes and their closer cousins. If you're intersted I could post some references.
>>>>>>Best regards
>>>>>>John
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>It has an elongated nose, but I wouldn't quite call it an appendage.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>I ask this out of true ignorance... what qualifies a snake as a "ratsnake"? I assumed that ratsnake moniker was simply a common name and made for some nice cross-over interest with the rear-fanged crowd.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Doug T
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Not a ratsnake but a very cool snake. That's the one with the nose appendage? Is it a rear fang?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Best regards
>>>>>>>>>>John
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>

No advice to add, just going to tell you I'm green with envy here
Beautiful snake!

>>Hi guys
>>
>>
>>
>>I'm not usually a ratsnake kind of guy, but I thought I'd show this one off to you aficionados of all things ratsnake.
>>
>>Anybody else here have any experience with these? So far they've been brain-dead-easy to take care of. Just looking for thoughts that you guys might have.
>>
>>Doug T
-----
3.1 yellow rat snake
1.1 Everglades rat snake
0.1 Baird's rat snake
1.1.1 ball python
0.1 speckled king
1.0 Honduran milk
0.0.2 rough green snake
0.1 Eastern conehead lizard
1.1 diamondback terrapin
1.0 Malayan box turtle

No experience but a handful of my Gonyosoma contacts also keep Philodryas spp. Without exception everyone raves about them and encourage me to keep them. No denying their beauty, that's for sure.
-----
Current snakes:

0.0.1 Gonyosoma oxycephala - Java locale (green)

1.2 Gonyosoma oxycephala - Jave local (green)

2.2 Gonyosoma janseni - Seleyar locale (all black)

1.2 Gonyosoma janseni - Celebes locale (Black & Tan)

>>Hi guys
>>
>>
>>
>>I'm not usually a ratsnake kind of guy, but I thought I'd show this one off to you aficionados of all things ratsnake.
>>
>>Anybody else here have any experience with these? So far they've been brain-dead-easy to take care of. Just looking for thoughts that you guys might have.
>>
>>Doug T

Doug, I don't have any experience with them, but they do seem similar to some of the Asian ratsnakes. There's one called, Rhyncophis boulengeri, I think, that bears a good resemblance. I wonder if there could be any connection. I would at least include them in genetic comparisons.

Nice looking snakes. Looks like they get pretty big.

Terry

Rynos are from a different part of the world. These two species would be an example of convergent evolution: different evolutionary histories leading to a similar survival strategy and appearance.

Another well known example are the sidewinders: one, American rattlesnake, the other, African pit viper.
-----
"I'll be back at 6 if not 7. 8 the very latest but definatly no later than 9...ish...Moscow time."

>>Rynos are from a different part of the world. These two species would be an example of convergent evolution: different evolutionary histories leading to a similar survival strategy and appearance.
>>
>>Another well known example are the sidewinders: one, American rattlesnake, the other, African pit viper.
>>-----
>>"I'll be back at 6 if not 7. 8 the very latest but definatly no later than 9...ish...Moscow time."

That's probably what they are, and it's a good example of convergent evolution, but there are also examples of related species/genera on both sides of the world. An example would be the ratsnakes in Asia/Europe and the ratsnakes/kingsnakes, etc, in North America. I was just suggesting it might be some type of ratsnake. I don't think anyone has ever tested it.

Terry

I would assume they are different. I think Philodryas are considered more racer like than rat like. Also, I don't think there are any rear-fanged rats.

Doesn't mean they didn't share a common ancestor with rat snakes, but I think they are pretty distantly related to the Ryno rats. A Philodryas study would certainly be nice.
-----
"I'll be back at 6 if not 7. 8 the very latest but definatly no later than 9...ish...Moscow time."

I would agree, a Philodryas study would be nice. I also assume they are much different taxonomically, as would most herpers, but there's still a possibility in my mind (because it looks like there's similarities or maybe convergent evolution), and I've never heard of any genetic studies with these snakes. I do know that ratsnakes from tropical s.e. Asia have a combination of racer and ratsnake characteristics; are considered fairly distantly related, and we still include them in our studies; and may have had tropical ancestors which were venomous and rearfanged.

For Philodryas to be related via the ancient racer/ratsnake ancestors there would have had to have been a tropical connection via Asia to N. A. to S. A. in the past, probably around the early Miocene. Best way to get rid of the question is to prove they aren't related...haha!

PS: Philodryas seems to be most like the Gonyosoma species or Rhyncophis, not the Elaphe.

Thanks for the post....

TC

>>I would assume they are different. I think Philodryas are considered more racer like than rat like. Also, I don't think there are any rear-fanged rats.
>>
>>Doesn't mean they didn't share a common ancestor with rat snakes, but I think they are pretty distantly related to the Ryno rats. A Philodryas study would certainly be nice.
>>-----
>>"I'll be back at 6 if not 7. 8 the very latest but definatly no later than 9...ish...Moscow time."

Doug,

Philodryas are gorgeous, but I have always had concerns about their bite. I remember hearing somewhere that their venom is non-trivial and they have to be handled carefully.

Any info?
-----
Chris Harrison
San Antonio, Texas

Chris,

I have heard that P. olfersii has a pretty bad bite but not much about the other species. Withing the past couple of years somebody posted a picture of themselves free handling a large P. olfersii. I think a handful of people jumped in and warned him about that.

The P. baroni keepers I know treat them like they are not a concern.

Personally, I would treat them all the same - like they are hot.
-----
Current snakes:

0.0.1 Gonyosoma oxycephala - Java locale (green)

1.2 Gonyosoma oxycephala - Jave local (green)

2.2 Gonyosoma janseni - Seleyar locale (all black)

1.2 Gonyosoma janseni - Celebes locale (Black & Tan)

Olfersii is responsible for at least one death in South America. The bite is considered worse than many other Philodryas, but there are several that are close in toxicity. Baroni is not among those that are considered particulary dangerous, and I have read about bites that weren't too bad before.

Doesn't mean you shouldn't be careful with those though.
-----
"I'll be back at 6 if not 7. 8 the very latest but definatly no later than 9...ish...Moscow time."

Like the other Chris H. said, p.olfersi are known to be pretty hot. The folks that I've talked to that were bit by baroni said it wasn't really an issue for them. Personal reactions would vary I'm sure.

Personally, mine are still pretty small and haven't bit out of defense yet. A defensive bite doesn't seem like something they do either, prefering to just skee-daddle. With all my snakes I use a snake hook to initially pick them out of the cage so that a feeding response is avoided.

My personal feeling is they belong in the same category of rear-fangs as hognoses, false water cobras or mussuranas. Don't let them chew on you and you'll be fine. If others want to play it more cautious and feel like they should be treated as hots, well, being over-cautious never hurt any snake keeper.

Doug T

Doug,

Although probably not a "ratsnake", as taxonomically related to the "Elaphe" and related genera, it looks a lot like a "ratsnake" and I would suggest that it probably behaves a lot like a ratsnake with similar requirements.

We've mentioned that it is rearfanged and technically venomous which makes it a little different from the Elaphe, Pantherophis, etc. Still, it could be very ratsnake-like in other ways (ratsnakes generally aren't rearfanged). Do these Pampas ratsnakes ever use constriction, like most ratsnakes; are they partially arboreal or terrestrial only; do they eat rodent and/or avain prey?

Thanks...Terry

>>Hi guys
>>
>>
>>
>>I'm not usually a ratsnake kind of guy, but I thought I'd show this one off to you aficionados of all things ratsnake.
>>
>>Anybody else here have any experience with these? So far they've been brain-dead-easy to take care of. Just looking for thoughts that you guys might have.
>>
>>Doug T

I can't answer all of that, but I do know that Philodryas have strictly arboreal and strictly terrestrial species. They are typically considered fast and more racer like that elaphe.
-----
"I'll be back at 6 if not 7. 8 the very latest but definatly no later than 9...ish...Moscow time."