Reptile & Amphibian Forums

Anyone?

There are absolutely NO genuine L.t.micropholis known to be in ANY U.S. or European private collections.......absolutely NONE! there used to be just a few very real-deal L.t.micropholis here in the country many years ago. However, those are no longer around and the last remaining specimens died years back. There was even a true anerythristic micropholis as well, but are all deceased now. There are only some micropholis x andesiana crosses in today's hobby, that's it. You can take this to the bank too. In other words, don't hold your breath for any real micropholis to pop up on the classifieds or on someone's show table. Same thing with L.t.smithi, L.t. dixoni, and 100% pure bloodline L.t.blanchardi. Myself and only a couple of others have the only available "blanchardi" bloodline in the entire U.S. or Europe. These have some polyzona influence from the original female that was imported from the Moscow Zoo. The male was a 100% pure patternless blanchardi found just outside of Quintana Roo, Mexico on a small chicken ranch on the Yucatan peninsula.

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

serpentinespecialties.webs.com/index.htm

Wow! Thanks for the info. You'd think there'd be some somewhere. Guess they weren't all that popular. I have contacted a reptile importer who thinks they MAY be able to find some. Just waiting to hear about a price and how verifiable that it would be pure Ecuadorian. This may end up being too expensive or too difficult.

You're welcome. It's not that they weren't popular, it's really about certain country import/export laws. Don't even THINK of putting any money up for a pair from somebody that claims to be able to get them or has some L.t.micropholis. You would have better luck tripping over a pirate's chest full of gold on a local beach. This is something that myself and other hardcore milk-head aficionado's know for an absolute fact, and have for many years now. If any of those three subspecies I mentioned were EVER available and obtainable at all, a few of us would already know about it and already have them. There are some things that are uncommon, and some things that simply cannot be obtained.......and those three subspecies are the three that cannot be obtained until one hopeful lucky day sometime beyond.

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

serpentinespecialties.webs.com/index.htm

I would have to see a photo of them directly next to a newspaper with the date showing on it to believe someone could locate any of these..LOL!. Show me a photo of anything anyone ever "claims" to be an L.t.micropholis beforehand. Odds are it wouldn't be anything even close, or an authentic photo from some other foreign country. Those are the only two possibilities.......

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

serpentinespecialties.webs.com/index.htm

Here are some right here as a matter of fact that Stu has.

This is also why he is labeling them as "South American Milks" because he is very aware of the fact that they are micropholis x andesiana intergrades. Nice unique animals.

Just be very VERY leary of anyone telling you that they can get you authentic L.t.micropholis. Anyone but the most experienced Central American milksnake buffs could easily be fooled if they don't know all about the tropical milksnake complex.
South American Milks (micropholis x andesiana)

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

serpentinespecialties.webs.com/index.htm

Are these from two adults that both come from an intergrade zone or are they the result of breeding a pure micropholis with a pure andesiana?
-----
www.hcu-tx.org/

The male came from the vicinity of Popayan, Colombia, which is in the micropholis x andesiana intergrade zone; the female was from an unknown South American locale. They are pretty cool milksnakes in their own right, but aren't really "pure" anything.

Understood. Too bad though..... I was hoping.

I agree! However, according to a very recent taxonomic revision of the Lampropeltis triangulum group, all of the animals formerly considered members of the subspecies gaigeae, andesiana, and micropholis are now grouped as their own, distinct species (Lampropeltis micropholis), with no subspecific designations. The new revision was based on mitochondrial and nuclear DNA, as well as morphology. It's an interesting study, and I hear there's more data to come.
-----
_______________________

-Cole

Ahhh, I feel ya Colester! Yeah, didn't know the proposed revision was actually etched in stone yet. Interesting.....well in that case, I guess nobody will be acquiring any genuine "Lampropeltis micropholis" anytime soon..

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

serpentinespecialties.webs.com/index.htm

Actually, it sounds like if the proposed revision is accepted, everything that was once considered L.t. gaigeae, L.t. andesiana, and L.t. andesiana x micropholis will be considered pure Lampropeltis micropholis going forward. Interesting...

The taxonomic proposal much more closely resembles that Blanchard put forth almost 100 years ago than anything since. It's also the first "look" at the triangulum group using modern analyses of both genetic data and morphology. Even if the proposals don't become widely accepted, the study presents a LOT of new data that we've never had before. Pretty cool, even if it does turn what we "know" about milksnakes on its head.

-----
_______________________

-Cole

Blanchard's 1921 monograph still dominates the Google search results for "lampropeltis revision"! Is this new study available online anywhere?
A Revision of the King Snakes: Genus Lampropeltis

Just noticed your e-mail!

Am I understanding this correctly?..

gaigeae, andesiana, and micropholis are now no longer considered triangulum, but all 3 are now just Lampropeltis micropholis?

If so, do andesiana/micropholis and gaigeae work how MBKs and splendida do. I know a lot consider MBKs to just be a melanistic population of splendida. So are what was formally gaigeae actually just melanistic micropholis/andesiana?

Aaron,

Yes, that's pretty much the gist of it. What's yet to be seen is whether this proposal becomes accepted by the community or not.
-----
_______________________

-Cole

And if it is accepted it could still be split into L. m. micropholis, L. m. gaigei and L. m. andesiana in the future. This is why I prefer to have some sort of locality data when possible.
-----
www.hcu-tx.org/

The locality data is what's important, really. There's a movement away from subspecies recognition in the systematics community, it seems. That said, there are often different genetic lineages within a species that, while not necessarily named, represent genetically identifiable populations that (IMO) shouldn't be "intermigled" with one another.
-----
_______________________

-Cole

Sounds very interesting, Cole... has this study been published anywhere yet? I'd be very curious to see how L.t. stuarti and the other Central American milksnakes fit into the picture.