>>That makes no sense. Brightly colored banded snakes RELY on a predator recognizing as a snake FIRST.>>

That is the common misconception. Many people believe that brightly banded snakes such as the tricolored kingsnake are conspicuous and therefore these are warning colors. Since these snakes themselves are not dangerous, they must be mimics of a dangerous animal, such as coral snakes.

Tricolored kingsnakes are certainly conspicuous when you remove them from their natural habitat. A tricolored kingsnake, or even a banded phase common kingsnake, when it is stretched out and crossing the road, is highly visible and immediately recognizable. However, when they are coiled and resting in their natural habitats, they blend in very well with their respective backgrounds. The cryptic coloration of tricolored kingsnakes in wooodland and forests have been independently observed by Goodman and Goodman (1976. Contrasting color and pattern as enticement displays in snakes. Herpetologica 32:145-148) and by Zweifel (1952, Pattern Variation and Evolutioin of the mountain kingsnake, Lampropeltis zonata. Copeia 1952:152-168).

Besides, even those who believe that the tricolored pattern is aposematic admit that there is not one single observation in nature in the entire history of mankind to show that the supposedly aposematic coloration of tricolored kingsnakes saved a snake from attack by a predator. There is nothing in the written or oral records of human beings to suggest that a predator, upon seeing a tricolored snake, shows fear and flee without attacking the snake. Therefore we have a total lack of evidence that the tricolor pattern is capable of deterring potential predators, despite literally thousands of years of observations of nature by human kind. At some point, we would need to conclude that such lack of evidence is really evidence that the tricolored pattern lacks the ability to warn predators. Faith works in religion, but it does not work in science. In science, evidence counts, and the supporters of the aposematic theory has no evidence that the tricolored kingsnake deters predators.

There was a study using clay models which suggests tricolored models are attacked less frequently than models that are unicolored. But this study is flawed. The results are consistent with the tricolored being seen less often also. The fewer attacks on the tricolored models can just as easily be explained by their disruptive coloration. Besides this study is not a substitute for real life observations between tricolored kingsnakes and predators in nature. As I write this, the supporters of the aposematic theory are still waiting for the first observation in nature of a predator being deterred by the tricolor pattern and as a result refrains from attacking the snake. How much longer will the aposematic theorists wait before they finally admit they are wrong? My guess is that they will still insist that tricolored kingsnakes are aposematic when they are on their death beds and the evidence they need are still not available.

[ Show Entire Thread ]