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
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>

[ Reply To This Message ] [ Subscribe to this Thread ] [ Show Entire Thread ]