Page 1 of 1

Milk Snakes from the last few years...Dial up warning.

Posted: September 10th, 2021, 12:12 pm
by ChadKS
Hello Folks. Here are some milks from the midwest.

floodplain milks from SE AR, syspila x amaura.
Image

SE AR
Image

SE Illinois
Image

NE KS
Image

W KS
Image

NW MO
Image

NW MO
Image

SW Illinois
Image

SE MO
Image

W KS
Image

SE Illinois
Image

SW Illinois
Image

SW Illinois
Image

SW Illinois
Image

S Illinois
Image

S Illinois
Image

NW Kentucky
Image

NW Kentucky
Image

C Kentucky
Image

N AZ
Image

SE MO
Image
Image

S Illinois
Image

S Illinois
Image

C MO
Image

S Illinois
Image

S Illinois hypo
Image
Image
Image

SE MO
Image

S Illinois
Image

NW MO
Image

C MO
Image

W KS
Image

W KS
Image

NW MO
Image

Wyoming
Image

Wyoming
Image

E KS
Image

S Illinois
Image

E KS
Image

S Illinois
Image

S Illinois
Image


Image

C MO
Image

NW MO
Image

Iowa
Image

SE OK
Image

SE AR
Image

E KS
Image

Re: Milk Snakes from the last few years...Dial up warning.

Posted: September 10th, 2021, 4:57 pm
by Scott Waters
Bro….very nice. Way to light up the ol’ FHF!

Scott

Re: Milk Snakes from the last few years...Dial up warning.

Posted: September 10th, 2021, 6:49 pm
by Kelly Mc
Stunners All.

Re: Milk Snakes from the last few years...Dial up warning.

Posted: September 12th, 2021, 10:01 pm
by hcarlton
Having only found one in the wild so far...I need to bump up my numbers clearly.
Stuck staring at that one piebald(? not really the right term but not sure what fits) one from western Kansas; that has got to be the coolest milk I've ever seen a photo of, and I'm dying now to try and figure out what the genetics or environmental effects are behind making that.

Re: Milk Snakes from the last few years...Dial up warning.

Posted: September 14th, 2021, 2:54 am
by Porter
hcarlton wrote:
September 12th, 2021, 10:01 pm
Stuck staring at that one piebald(? not really the right term but not sure what fits) one from western Kansas; that has got to be the coolest milk I've ever seen a photo of, and I'm dying now to try and figure out what the genetics or environmental effects are behind making that.
Hybrid 🦏

Re: Milk Snakes from the last few years...Dial up warning.

Posted: September 14th, 2021, 9:08 am
by Kelly Mc
Its an allele blip.

Pattern/color anomaly can happen in any pigmented animal. But seems to be most common in animals prone to "locality" or individual variability.

Because human beings are so visually oriented and even extend values on visual differences we tend to put inordinate focus on them inmo.

Someone fluent in the card deck of milk mutations could explain the probable recessive outcomes responsible.

Re: Milk Snakes from the last few years...Dial up warning.

Posted: September 14th, 2021, 3:33 pm
by Porter
🗺

ImageUntitled by The Singing Frog, on Flickr

ImageUntitled by The Singing Frog, on Flickr

ImageUntitled by The Singing Frog, on Flickr

Re: Milk Snakes from the last few years...Dial up warning.

Posted: September 15th, 2021, 10:13 pm
by Porter
OK so here’s my reasoning… It’s based mostly off of the other individuals found in W Kansas. I’m assuming they’re from the same locale, or close to it. They are the only milk snakes that have a lateral fade on the side of their bodies. Which is a trait of the longnose. Even the piebald individual has this fading. In the other photos, those individuals also have this bizarre unique patterning. Which is usually influenced by hybridIzation (like in trout/fish) they have similar markings as rhino and their snouts look more slender to My eye. I think it is the influence of 🦏 🧬

I have spoken… ✋🏻 Like Nick Nolte. The ugnaught 💁🏻‍♂️

EB90721E-B18A-4255-93B1-C5F00BBFED5C.jpeg

Re: Milk Snakes from the last few years...Dial up warning.

Posted: September 16th, 2021, 1:47 pm
by ChadKS
Porter wrote:
September 15th, 2021, 10:13 pm
OK so here’s my reasoning… It’s based mostly off of the other individuals found in W Kansas. I’m assuming they’re from the same locale, or close to it. They are the only milk snakes that have a lateral fade on the side of their bodies. Which is a trait of the longnose. Even the piebald individual has this fading. In the other photos, those individuals also have this bizarre unique patterning. Which is usually influenced by hybridIzation (like in trout/fish) they have similar markings as rhino and their snouts look more slender to My eye. I think it is the influence of 🦏 🧬

I have spoken… ✋🏻 Like Nick Nolte. The ugnaught 💁🏻‍♂️


EB90721E-B18A-4255-93B1-C5F00BBFED5C.jpeg
I get your reasoning and commend you for putting thought into it. However, these snakes definitely are not hybrids and that's certain. Not only do these specific milks come from a geographic area that isn't shared by longnoses, but they just do not hybridize anywhere where the two types do occur sympatrically. If you have an example I would be incredibly stoked to see it. Both are fairly conspicuous creatures for herpers and yet a hybrid has never been presented or documented, at least to my geeky milk snake knowledge. Thanks for the interesting topic.

Re: Milk Snakes from the last few years...Dial up warning.

Posted: September 16th, 2021, 2:44 pm
by Porter
Oh have those individuals been tail-clipped and analyzed already? I was under the impression that longnose Were up for consideration to be put on a threatened list for Kansas at one time… maybe it was just some thing I miss read. Are you saying that there are no longnose upstream from where you found your individuals? Also, is there documentation saying they did not exist there in the 1800s?

In northern California, there is only one locale where you can find hybrid kingsnake x gopher snake. However, you can find kingsnakes and gopher snakes existing together throughout the state. They’ve only chosen to hybridize at this one specific locale though. For whatever reason. So just because the two exist in other areas doesn’t necessarily mean that the individuals in your photos aren’t of both DNA.

Re: Milk Snakes from the last few years...Dial up warning.

Posted: September 16th, 2021, 3:53 pm
by Jeff
Chad
The tricolorgasm hit me about halfway through, so I left the post to finish on its own.
My only trip to E Kansas was to the Flint Hills with Tom Sinclair. We found 15 milks in 48 hours, and despite the great variation, I was milk-satiated. Here in S Louisiana my best day is 3, and 2 milk-days are infrequent.
There seems to be a lower Midwest form that would be syspila, which includes most of your photos from E KS to W KY and Iowa south into Arkansas. What got my attention was how very different the western snakes were from the 'syspila' bunch. In fact, the N AZ snake could almost pass for a zonata.
Yours is a classic presentation of how variation within a subspecies can eclipse defined differences between subspecies.
As Scott said, great to see a FHF revival.

Porter
Cal Kings/gopher hybrids? Did I miss a post on these, or, do you have photos?

Jeff

Re: Milk Snakes from the last few years...Dial up warning.

Posted: September 16th, 2021, 11:49 pm
by Porter
Jeff wrote:
September 16th, 2021, 3:53 pm

Porter
Cal Kings/gopher hybrids? Did I miss a post on these, or, do you have photos?

Jeff
🤐

Re: Milk Snakes from the last few years...Dial up warning.

Posted: September 17th, 2021, 11:22 am
by ChadKS
Jeff wrote:
September 16th, 2021, 3:53 pm
Chad
The tricolorgasm hit me about halfway through, so I left the post to finish on its own.
My only trip to E Kansas was to the Flint Hills with Tom Sinclair. We found 15 milks in 48 hours, and despite the great variation, I was milk-satiated. Here in S Louisiana my best day is 3, and 2 milk-days are infrequent.
There seems to be a lower Midwest form that would be syspila, which includes most of your photos from E KS to W KY and Iowa south into Arkansas. What got my attention was how very different the western snakes were from the 'syspila' bunch. In fact, the N AZ snake could almost pass for a zonata.
Yours is a classic presentation of how variation within a subspecies can eclipse defined differences between subspecies.
As Scott said, great to see a FHF revival.

Porter
Cal Kings/gopher hybrids? Did I miss a post on these, or, do you have photos?

Jeff
Great to hear from you, it's almost like the old days here on FHF.

I do agree with you re: the sharp differences between L t. gentilis and L. t. triangulum "syspila" in the Midwest. I love living in KS where I've had my own laboratory to note these morphological differences and geographic subtleties. I think the syspila from east of the Mississippi are often visually different enough from those just west of the river that I can typically guess the locality with accuracy above random chance.

Re: Milk Snakes from the last few years...Dial up warning.

Posted: September 17th, 2021, 11:26 am
by ChadKS
Porter wrote:
September 16th, 2021, 2:44 pm
Oh have those individuals been tail-clipped and analyzed already? I was under the impression that longnose Were up for consideration to be put on a threatened list for Kansas at one time… maybe it was just some thing I miss read. Are you saying that there are no longnose upstream from where you found your individuals? Also, is there documentation saying they did not exist there in the 1800s?

In northern California, there is only one locale where you can find hybrid kingsnake x gopher snake. However, you can find kingsnakes and gopher snakes existing together throughout the state. They’ve only chosen to hybridize at this one specific locale though. For whatever reason. So just because the two exist in other areas doesn’t necessarily mean that the individuals in your photos aren’t of both DNA.
I found either the northernmost or second northernmost longnose in Kansas, not that it's relevant to our discussion, but I have also spent a lot of time herping the area where many of the above western milks came from. I believe longnose snakes are not present above Edwards County, but the Logan County snake found by my friend Curtis Schmidt does negate that belief.

Anyway, I couldn't tell you whether or not tail clips have been collected and analyzed. Why do you ask?

I see no reason to inject the notion that the snakes in my pics are hybrids or descendants of hybrids. What explanatory power does that notion bring to the table? Is it a matter of morphology? The weirdo gentilis with the speckles is just a variation.

Re: Milk Snakes from the last few years...Dial up warning.

Posted: September 17th, 2021, 10:49 pm
by Porter
😐
ChadKS wrote:
September 17th, 2021, 11:26 am
I see no reason to inject the notion that the snakes in my pics are hybrids or descendants of hybrids. What explanatory power does that notion bring to the table? Is it a matter of morphology? The weirdo gentilis with the speckles is just a variation.
The other guy asked why the piebald was piebald… So I told him lol
ChadKS wrote:
September 17th, 2021, 11:26 am
[
I found either the northernmost or second northernmost longnose in Kansas, not that it's relevant to our discussion, but I have also spent a lot of time herping the area where many of the above western milks came from. I believe longnose snakes are not present above Edwards County, but the Logan County snake found by my friend Curtis Schmidt does negate that belief.

Anyway, I couldn't tell you whether or not tail clips have been collected and analyzed. Why do you ask?
OK, I’m gonna keep this as simple as possible so forgive me for leaving out any specifics. Let’s just go back to the year 1800. I’m sure we can all agree that the snakes were at least they’re 50 years before being discovered.
B96D979A-F4F0-4FF3-876B-2F9130E46A22.jpeg
First you must be familiar with a Mandel theory. So here’s a video for people who are not familiar with it:




Next lets remind ourselves why herpetologist analyze tail clippings. They do it to determine whether or not A snake is a hybrid, different species, whether or not it’s a southern Pacific pond turtle or Northern Pacific Pond turtle, etc… only by looking at the DNA within the tail clipping, can you determine whether or not your milkshake is a hybridization with the longnose… in theory. Then we musk ask, when did we have the ability to do DNA testing:
E3AA7CE1-02D2-49A7-9140-FAC10CA16D53.jpeg


Now, let’s say the first time a longnose Snake mated a milk was 1800. Even though, and intelligent mind would consider that it happened much much much longer before that. Now according to the Mandel Theory, that long nose snake trait of lateral pattern fading on the side, would have gotten passed down through generations, every spring, since the year of 1800.

The first milk snake DNA was analyzed, at the very soonest in the year of1984… which an intelligent mind might assume, that when we came up with the ability to DNA test things, we didn’t go running to milk snakes. But to keep it simple let’s just say it was 1984.

This would mean, that the first milk snake ever tested under tail clipping DNA measures, contained the DNA of the longnose, of which it’s great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great grandpappy got shaken with back in 1800. So even if you were to analyze the tail clipping of your snakes…. And it came back 100% milksnake…That doesn’t necessarily mean it’s not containing longnose DNA. It only means that the scientists think that specific Genetic coding of DNA is that of a milk snake, based on the visual appearance of the milk snake they analyzed back in 1984. Which very well could have been just a brother or sister hybrid that was not displaying longnose characteristics, visually.


D1ACB582-A632-4F6C-BADC-11308F3ACDFE.jpeg
952DEF1B-27E5-4CBF-AB58-55F05E7EF44B.jpeg

Re: Milk Snakes from the last few years...Dial up warning.

Posted: September 18th, 2021, 5:27 am
by Kelly Mc
Piebalding is a mutation in genes that causes melanin to be distributed weird.

It isnt a sign of being hybridized as far as i know.

Re: Milk Snakes from the last few years...Dial up warning.

Posted: September 18th, 2021, 5:56 am
by Porter
Kelly Mc wrote:
September 18th, 2021, 5:27 am
Piebalding is a mutation in genes that causes melanin to be distributed weird.

It isnt a sign of being hybridized as far as i know.
I agree. One of the most commonly known snakes in the pet trade for its pie baldness, would have to be the ball python. And I wouldn’t suggest that those are hybrids. However, I think there are plenty of hybridized ball pythons in the pet trade… so, whether or not pie baldness originally Resulted from one of those crossbreeding’s, is some thing a breeder would have to answer. I’ve never had an interest in breeding reptiles so I wouldn’t know. But I’d say it’s a possible freakish outcome… And one that might want to be kept secret to a money driven pet breeder

Like the guy who likes the piebald milksnake pointed out, it’s not piebald. It’s just got some freakish lack of pigmentation. Again, the evidence that it’s a result of 🦏 🧬 is the pattern fading on the sides.
And just the simple fact that, how could any field Herper look at all the individuals posted from WKS, and not immediately think the thought in their mind… “That one looks like a longnose!” :lol:
Especially in comparison to the other individuals
hcarlton wrote:
September 12th, 2021, 10:01 pm
Having only found one in the wild so far...I need to bump up my numbers clearly.
Stuck staring at that one piebald(? not really the right term but not sure what fits) one from western Kansas; that has got to be the coolest milk I've ever seen a photo of, and I'm dying now to try and figure out what the genetics or environmental effects are behind making that.
459E135B-15B6-481D-A2CA-26B29AA6B6CA.jpeg

Re: Milk Snakes from the last few years...Dial up warning.

Posted: September 18th, 2021, 11:09 am
by hcarlton
Beyond wishful thinking, there's no signals of hybridization here, and "lateral fading" in milks is definitely not automatically some old trait passed down from longnoses. Pics are shared fairly frequently from the region where I live of milks that have lighter sides than dorsal patterning (hell the one I found showed a bit of that), and the nearest longnose to me is a 5 hour drive almost straight south (several hundred miles across a very distinct climatic gradient). And no, there aren't a bunch of hybrid pythons being intermixed in the trade, nor are just about any of the morphs seen in them the result of such; herpetoculture tends to be really, really touchy about hybrids period, and most big breeders of the major species represented won't even think of such a thing beyond a quick side project. Those who do work with hybrids tend to be really touchy about keeping records on such as well. The snake is cool, and I would love to know the actual factors behind the appearance (from a thesis I did a few years ago I know environmental incubation conditions could play a major role in this, never mind just genes), but the likelihood of it being because HYBRIDS is minuscule at best.
In my other major hobby (plants), hybridization is a huge thing and examining inheritance of traits is a major factor in trying to pick up characteristics that we want in crosses; understanding that a single species can be ridiculously variable and that hybridization past the 5th or 6th generation of backcrossing is basically a non-acknowledgeable thing unless you do sweeping genetic tests (and even then the signal is probably not going to show up most of the time)

Re: Milk Snakes from the last few years...Dial up warning.

Posted: September 18th, 2021, 12:31 pm
by Kelly Mc
There was a pretty vigorous craze that is hopefully dwindling, not sure but not as in ones face as before, where temps were deliberately manipulated to create piebalding and other variants. But the temp incited the gene deviation, as its all in the genes.

Re: Milk Snakes from the last few years...Dial up warning.

Posted: September 18th, 2021, 3:22 pm
by hcarlton
In that case, no it's not in the genes themselves. It's in the epigenetic regulators, the environment altering enzymatic ability to turn on and off controls for pigments and impacting methylation patterns that lock and unlock the ability to read genes. If it were genetic alteration the offspring of said animals in the next or subsequent generations would display similar traits even without altering incubation conditions, but they instead typically revert to normal pigmentation patterns.

Re: Milk Snakes from the last few years...Dial up warning.

Posted: September 18th, 2021, 4:51 pm
by Kelly Mc
Got it. Ive not explored it too deeply.
I just hate herp crazes.

Re: Milk Snakes from the last few years...Dial up warning.

Posted: September 18th, 2021, 6:47 pm
by Scott Waters
Porter wrote:
September 16th, 2021, 2:44 pm
Oh have those individuals been tail-clipped and analyzed already? I was under the impression that longnose Were up for consideration to be put on a threatened list for Kansas at one time… maybe it was just some thing I miss read. Are you saying that there are no longnose upstream from where you found your individuals? Also, is there documentation saying they did not exist there in the 1800s?

In northern California, there is only one locale where you can find hybrid kingsnake x gopher snake. However, you can find kingsnakes and gopher snakes existing together throughout the state. They’ve only chosen to hybridize at this one specific locale though. For whatever reason. So just because the two exist in other areas doesn’t necessarily mean that the individuals in your photos aren’t of both DNA.
Are talking about the one “king-gopher hybrid” found near Davis many years ago? Chad……if I recall it was said to have been found along a heavily herped stretch near Davis. I saw pics of it, believe it was posted here but I can’t remember now. I only know of that one instance.

Porter… have more of those been reported and I’ve missed it?

Re: Milk Snakes from the last few years...Dial up warning.

Posted: September 19th, 2021, 7:46 am
by Porter
hcarlton wrote:
September 18th, 2021, 11:09 am
Beyond wishful thinking, there's no signals of hybridization here, and "lateral fading" in milks is definitely not automatically some old trait passed down from longnoses. Pics are shared fairly frequently from the region where I live of milks that have lighter sides than dorsal patterning (hell the one I found showed a bit of that), and the nearest longnose to me is a 5 hour drive almost straight south (several hundred miles across a very distinct climatic gradient). And no, there aren't a bunch of hybrid pythons being intermixed in the trade, nor are just about any of the morphs seen in them the result of such; herpetoculture tends to be really, really touchy about hybrids period, and most big breeders of the major species represented won't even think of such a thing beyond a quick side project. Those who do work with hybrids tend to be really touchy about keeping records on such as well. The snake is cool, and I would love to know the actual factors behind the appearance (from a thesis I did a few years ago I know environmental incubation conditions could play a major role in this, never mind just genes), but the likelihood of it being because HYBRIDS is minuscule at best.
In my other major hobby (plants), hybridization is a huge thing and examining inheritance of traits is a major factor in trying to pick up characteristics that we want in crosses; understanding that a single species can be ridiculously variable and that hybridization past the 5th or 6th generation of backcrossing is basically a non-acknowledgeable thing unless you do sweeping genetic tests (and even then the signal is probably not going to show up most of the time)
8AA41FBE-03E3-4E63-9AE3-06D046B5299D.jpeg

This is a range map for Longnose snakes in California. Only where I’ve placed the little blue dot, can you find a longnose Snake Within that range, north of San Francisco. Not a single one of those snakes has been found within that range displayed. And there are quite a few study sites with active herpetology and restoration going on within that range. Still as far as I know, no one has seen a single longnose in who knows how many years. Now, like the arboreal salamander in Amador county… I’m sure there are some longnose within that range hidden away somewhere. I’m assuming that’s what’s going on with his milksnake hybrid and probably yours as well. Also, I don’t know how these range maps were originally established. But if it was somewhere around the year 1850… I’m guessing there could’ve been longnose outside of the range displayed here before they were pushed more and more into extinction by their praying-mantis like dominant brethren, the Lampropeltis.

D2B0E722-93F0-4E9E-AC54-FA98CB5D8ABC.jpeg
Scott Waters wrote:
September 18th, 2021, 6:47 pm
Are talking about the one “king-gopher hybrid” found near Davis many years ago? Chad……if I recall it was said to have been found along a heavily herped stretch near Davis. I saw pics of it, believe it was posted here but I can’t remember now. I only know of that one instance.

Porter… have more of those been reported and I’ve missed it?
No, but I'm guessing it's the same locale where Brian's dad found it. Or at least that's what I assume. There's not much that I can say about it. I swore secrecy with someone to never share the info in effort to protected them from being collected. I've scouted the place early in the year to learn it's moisture patterns and I can tell you that it definitely seems as if at least someone else knows about it. Herped in a way where they flipped rocks and didn't put back ones that don't look like they would produce for them, not resealing moisture seals to the rocks that do look good, and hitting it as early as february or sooner. It was easy to see that they frantically and lustfully where targeting something... which gives me the impression they knew what they were looking for.

I will say this.. It was revealed to us in a way that was nothing less than a God-send. And that's how we both see it... that it was handed down to us because he knew we would protect it.



Ok... So, I have a story. Once upon a time, back around 2011. A series of Sierra Nevada Ensatina variations were posted to the forum from a secluded unknown population in Amador county. They were disregarded as nothing less than your average variation and no one noticed that one had a Yellow eye blotch. Understandable... sometimes the flash of a camera can cause a reflection, and such a thing can easily be overlooked by an inattentive or disinterested viewer. But the point is, a Amador county first record hybrid passed under the noses of the forum's best without a single raise of the brow, and when the forum was at it's most active, with it's most knowledgeable members. But there is a more important message of enlightenment here.. Or at very least, something to consider. Let's drive down the mountain, across the valley, and into the bay area. Where we find none-the-less than the very litter bugger responsible for all of this confusion... the Yellow-eyed ensatina. However, more importantly.. it's intergrade zones. At the top of their range, you find them intergraded with the Oregons and at the bottom intergraded with the Monterey. In both intergrade zones, you will find individuals that look like intergrades and individuals that look like perfect Yellow-eyed ensatina. However ALL are considered to be intergrades.

CE431858-FC84-44C6-AEA8-D3A084D6FDFC.jpeg

Now lets drive back to Amador county and talk about Hybrids. Here are 3 individuals found no more than 20 feet apart from one another:

The first displays High orange coloration. A characteristic of the Sierra Nevada X Yellow-eyed hybrids pointed out to us by Chad Lane 2017 discovery of the Calaveras (?) county hybrids.

The 2nd displays the non-debatable blotch in the upper part of the eye. Along with faded pigmenting and the least amount of orange between the 14-15 individuals found that day.

The third is much darker, appearing melanistic to the eye, with far more smoothly defined blotches:

ImageFotoJet - 2020-12-24T111149.145 by The Singing Frog, on Flickr

ImageFotoJet - 2020-12-24T111332.951 by The Singing Frog, on Flickr

ImageFotoJet - 2020-12-24T110732.909 by The Singing Frog, on Flickr

ImageFotoJet - 2020-12-24T110341.285 by The Singing Frog, on Flickr

Now, I understand that from a scientific and intelligent standpoint one must only certify the 2nd ensatina as a hybrid. Because it is in no-question a Sierra Nevada X Yelloweyed ensatina hybrid. But the fact of the matter is... these 3 ensatina come from a lineage that dates back before the 1800s. The possibility that they remained separate up until 15 years prior to me finding them (ensatina live about 15 yrs; these were adults) is about as possible as his milksnake not having longnose DNA in that locale. The fact of the matter is... like all the intergrades are intergades, all the ensatina in the photos from Amador, are hybrids. But only one of them is indisputable to the eye

Re: Milk Snakes from the last few years...Dial up warning.

Posted: September 19th, 2021, 9:27 am
by Kelly Mc
You put far more emphasis on coloration and pattern nuances than herpetology does, from my understanding.

Re: Milk Snakes from the last few years...Dial up warning.

Posted: September 19th, 2021, 9:29 am
by Porter
Jeez Louise Kelly… Can you wait one dang second for me to finish my post lol Now I can’t re-edit it and I have to add the rest of it here:

5EF3FEDF-A91D-46B8-BA72-A9B9D45A0FF4.jpeg
FC3380BB-758D-4223-B274-21B818E3749F.jpeg

I’m done for the day and I’m not gonna be riding anymore. Leave me alone lol everyone. I have spoken ✋🏻 Like Nick Nolte. The ugnaught 💁🏻‍♂️


:sleep:

Re: Milk Snakes from the last few years...Dial up warning.

Posted: September 19th, 2021, 9:46 am
by Kelly Mc
Sorry. I could be wrong its just a shared perspective and perhaps a dated one. No harm meant, but the things i have valued the most learning came out of a reconsideration of my own perceptions.

Re: Milk Snakes from the last few years...Dial up warning.

Posted: September 19th, 2021, 2:50 pm
by Jeff
This is a range map for Longnose snakes in California. Only where I’ve placed the little blue dot, can you find a longnose Snake Within that range, north of San Francisco. Not a single one of those snakes has been found within that range displayed. And there are quite a few study sites with active herpetology and restoration going on within that range. Still as far as I know, no one has seen a single longnose in who knows how many years.
Porter
These sentences are difficult to interpret. Can longnoses only be found within the blue-marked area (which is not north of San Francisco, or is that a second matter)? Or, have no longnoses been found within the blue area, or, not within the red area? I've seen longnoses from a number of places within Alameda, San Joaquin, Santa Clara, Merced, and San Benito Counties within the past 45 years (maybe that's many years).
Also, Gary's map doesn't include some records, such as NE Mendocino Co. and central Santa Barbara County. Sorry, I may be getting daft as I age, but what is the point with the blue area?

Here is a link to a pertinent paper on the platensis/xanthoptica interface in the central Sierras: http://webpages.icav.up.pt/ptdc/bia-bec ... satina.pdf

Jeff

Re: Milk Snakes from the last few years...Dial up warning.

Posted: September 19th, 2021, 6:10 pm
by Porter
Jeff wrote:
September 19th, 2021, 2:50 pm
This is a range map for Longnose snakes in California. Only where I’ve placed the little blue dot, can you find a longnose Snake Within that range, north of San Francisco. Not a single one of those snakes has been found within that range displayed. And there are quite a few study sites with active herpetology and restoration going on within that range. Still as far as I know, no one has seen a single longnose in who knows how many years.
Porter
These sentences are difficult to interpret. Can longnoses only be found within the blue-marked area (which is not north of San Francisco, or is that a second matter)? Or, have no longnoses been found within the blue area, or, not within the red area? I've seen longnoses from a number of places within Alameda, San Joaquin, Santa Clara, Merced, and San Benito Counties within the past 45 years (maybe that's many years).
Also, Gary's map doesn't include some records, such as NE Mendocino Co. and central Santa Barbara County. Sorry, I may be getting daft as I age, but what is the point with the blue area?

Here is a link to a pertinent paper on the platensis/xanthoptica interface in the central Sierras: http://webpages.icav.up.pt/ptdc/bia-bec ... satina.pdf

Jeff

I meant, there have been no longnose found anywhere within the red range that is above the blue dot/green section (as far as I know). The blue dot is the northern most locale for the Central Valley. It represents the Alameda county population. There has been only 1 record for Contra Costa county, (as far as I know). That was the only individual found north of Alameda that I knew of until you just mention Mendocino. I have a strong feeling that there could/should be some at the Buttes. I tried a couple times but came up empty handed. Has Jackson Shed ever found one there..?

FFE9808D-09E4-4E2D-A3F9-B72CA508CA19.jpeg


If one was found in Mendocino, that pretty rad :thumb: When was that Jeff? How many were found..?

Still, my point here is to show the regression of the species from it's known northern range in CA to help these guys understand whats happening'has happened with the Longnose in thier milklands 🥛 They are far more common in the southern part of their range.

Re: Milk Snakes from the last few years...Dial up warning.

Posted: September 20th, 2021, 4:38 pm
by Jeff
Porter
Of the 17 counties with portions within your green zone, I know of longnoses from 6, based on personal, photo, museum and published records. All are from the hilly periphery, and none from the Central Valley itself except for one from the Sutter Buttes (1950s). The single record from Mendocino County is from 1919, and is based on a museum specimen that was confirmed as Rhinocheilus by L. M. Klauber.
My niece sent me a photo of one that she found in lower Calaveras County (maybe six years ago). The Sutter Buttes record is 1952.
You are correct that the Long-nosed Snake is very 'regressed' in the northern portion of central California.
Jeff

Re: Milk Snakes from the last few years...Dial up warning.

Posted: September 21st, 2021, 12:31 pm
by Porter
Jeff wrote:
September 19th, 2021, 2:50 pm
This is a range map for Longnose snakes in California. Only where I’ve placed the little blue dot, can you find a longnose Snake Within that range, north of San Francisco. Not a single one of those snakes has been found within that range displayed. And there are quite a few study sites with active herpetology and restoration going on within that range. Still as far as I know, no one has seen a single longnose in who knows how many years.
Porter
These sentences are difficult to interpret. Can longnoses only be found within the blue-marked area (which is not north of San Francisco, or is that a second matter)? Or, have no longnoses been found within the blue area, or, not within the red area? I've seen longnoses from a number of places within Alameda, San Joaquin, Santa Clara, Merced, and San Benito Counties within the past 45 years (maybe that's many years).
Also, Gary's map doesn't include some records, such as NE Mendocino Co. and central Santa Barbara County. Sorry, I may be getting daft as I age, but what is the point with the blue area?

Here is a link to a pertinent paper on the platensis/xanthoptica interface in the central Sierras: http://webpages.icav.up.pt/ptdc/bia-bec ... satina.pdf

Jeff
Jeff, what I mean by this is that anywhere within the green area, right now present time, or within the last 10 years, you can’t find a longnose snake. I should have written that.

Jeff wrote:
September 20th, 2021, 4:38 pm
Porter
Of the 17 counties with portions within your green zone, I know of longnoses from 6, based on personal, photo, museum and published records. All are from the hilly periphery, and none from the Central Valley itself except for one from the Sutter Buttes (1950s). The single record from Mendocino County is from 1919, and is based on a museum specimen that was confirmed as Rhinocheilus by L. M. Klauber.
My niece sent me a photo of one that she found in lower Calaveras County (maybe six years ago). The Sutter Buttes record is 1952.
You are correct that the Long-nosed Snake is very 'regressed' in the northern portion of central California.
Jeff
OK the Mendocino record makes more sense now. I thought you were saying they recently found one. I ran into Jackson Shed (herpetologist assigned to the buttes) one time out in the desert. I decided to drive out there during a heavy rain storm in July. There was a guy parked on the side of the road shining a cut for scorpions. We exchanged names and I said, “oh you’re the guy that found that purple Coachwhip up at the buttes!?” …He said to me, “ oh you’re the guy that found all those variations of giant Gartersnake.” I think I asked him if he had found a longnose up at the buttes, And I think his response was no… But I’m not 100% sure of that. That’s awesome to hear that one was found back in the 1950s! It looks like perfect habitat for them. I checked it out one time while driving further north with my ex girlfriend so herp/Explore some land up above it. I couldn’t help but drive out to the buttes after seeing it from a distance and thinking, “there is where are the longnose Snake I’m looking for is going to be” lol As far as I know there have been no recent finds

But my point of all this is to display some insight to long nose in regards to the milkshakes. To show what’s going on with the long nose snake in their milk snake habitats

Re: Milk Snakes from the last few years...Dial up warning.

Posted: September 21st, 2021, 4:30 pm
by hcarlton
So my post was quoted with a picture of known ball hybrids (and I'm familiar with most that have been made or attempted so far, part of several hybrid groups because the impact on pattern structure etc. intrigues me)...but glossed over the "intermixed" part that should be emphasized. Those hybrids are kept as such, not worked back into the general ball breeding pool in much any way, anywhere, because most people want either F1/F2 hybrids (if they want them at all) or pure species, not the million things that could result in between because of the tracking difficulty. At this point the reference is getting to be more red herring than supporting anything...
And the milksnakes around me have never encountered longnoses. Unless you go back to pre-glaciation periods somewhere the climate would never have supported them as far north or against the mountains as I am. As pointed out by others too color is a long ways from being what should be used as any sort of hybrid diagnosis, especially in different genera that have extremely distinct morphological/physiological separations beyond their external patterns and have been separated for millenia; a one-off odd hybrid is not out of question, but likelihood of introgression from there is minimal at best. And trying to compare them against same-genus reproductively flexible creatures with a lot of troublesome things like ring species in them like Ensatinasor other salamanders is really apples to oranges as well. If there were some more solid structural trait that was being pointed out (scales that shouldn't be there, orientations that are way off, someone had skeletal references that point to another genus instead of Lampropeltis, an actual genetic record), I could consider hybrid possibility, but when it's based on a variation of natural countershading, range overlaps (normal for separate genera even if somewhat related), and little else...it's about as supported as finding a rubber boa naturally in Tennessee.

Re: Milk Snakes from the last few years...Dial up warning.

Posted: September 21st, 2021, 5:00 pm
by Kelly Mc
Chromatophore changes in amphibians make for added moot in 'pigmentation differences" being a credible litmus or correlating example.

Re: Milk Snakes from the last few years...Dial up warning.

Posted: September 21st, 2021, 5:01 pm
by Porter
hcarlton wrote:
September 21st, 2021, 4:30 pm
So my post was quoted with a picture of known ball hybrids (and I'm familiar with most that have been made or attempted so far, part of several hybrid groups because the impact on pattern structure etc. intrigues me)...but glossed over the "intermixed" part that should be emphasized. Those hybrids are kept as such, not worked back into the general ball breeding pool in much any way, anywhere, because most people want either F1/F2 hybrids (if they want them at all) or pure species, not the million things that could result in between because of the tracking difficulty. At this point the reference is getting to be more red herring than supporting anything...
And the milksnakes around me have never encountered longnoses. Unless you go back to pre-glaciation periods somewhere the climate would never have supported them as far north or against the mountains as I am. As pointed out by others too color is a long ways from being what should be used as any sort of hybrid diagnosis, especially in different genera that have extremely distinct morphological/physiological separations beyond their external patterns and have been separated for millenia; a one-off odd hybrid is not out of question, but likelihood of introgression from there is minimal at best. And trying to compare them against same-genus reproductively flexible creatures with a lot of troublesome things like ring species in them like Ensatinasor other salamanders is really apples to oranges as well. If there were some more solid structural trait that was being pointed out (scales that shouldn't be there, orientations that are way off, someone had skeletal references that point to another genus instead of Lampropeltis, an actual genetic record), I could consider hybrid possibility, but when it's based on a variation of natural countershading, range overlaps (normal for separate genera even if somewhat related), and little else...it's about as supported as finding a rubber boa naturally in Tennessee.
Are there any normal looking Ball Pythons produced in ratio of a hybrid love conection...?

So, check it out. You're saying that where the Milksnakes are, is too far up the mountain for longnose to ever had existed past the ice age... What about below your faded milks? In California, it's known that if you want to find a zonata, you'll have to drive up the mountain to an elevation of 3000-4000 ft. That's right now, present time. Now they did exist much lower at one time. I found (actually an ex-love fling) a DOR at around 1500 ft (more precise, 1700 ft). When I told Brian Hubbs this, he was not surprised. Nor was he surprised when I told him you can still find them in Placerville. However historically, they were found as low or lower than 768 ft, if I remember correctly. That's based on someone telling me they used to find the in Roseville CA. (768 is the elevation of El Dorado Hills). Here's what I propose... the milk mated the rhino, climbed up the hill because it was getting too hot (like what collard lizards are currently doing), mated a milk, they climbed up over the years as high as they could go, mated another milk, and so forth... until now you have longnose DNA in a mountainous habbitat 🥵 = 🐍=🧬=🐍=🧬=🐍=🧬=🐍=🧬=🐍=🧬=🐍=🧬=🐍=🧬=🐍===🔜 🥶

Re: Milk Snakes from the last few years...Dial up warning.

Posted: September 21st, 2021, 5:57 pm
by Porter
Kelly Mc wrote:
September 21st, 2021, 5:00 pm
Chromatophore changes in amphibians make for added moot in 'pigmentation differences" being a credible litmus or correlating example.
🤔 Are you saying yay or nay to the Porter Theory?

Re: Milk Snakes from the last few years...Dial up warning.

Posted: September 22nd, 2021, 6:49 am
by Kelly Mc
Im not sure :) Its just that 'phibs go from darker to lighter so readily. Sometimes dramatically.

Re: Milk Snakes from the last few years...Dial up warning.

Posted: September 22nd, 2021, 9:49 am
by hcarlton
Porter wrote:
September 21st, 2021, 5:01 pm
hcarlton wrote:
September 21st, 2021, 4:30 pm
So my post was quoted with a picture of known ball hybrids (and I'm familiar with most that have been made or attempted so far, part of several hybrid groups because the impact on pattern structure etc. intrigues me)...but glossed over the "intermixed" part that should be emphasized. Those hybrids are kept as such, not worked back into the general ball breeding pool in much any way, anywhere, because most people want either F1/F2 hybrids (if they want them at all) or pure species, not the million things that could result in between because of the tracking difficulty. At this point the reference is getting to be more red herring than supporting anything...
And the milksnakes around me have never encountered longnoses. Unless you go back to pre-glaciation periods somewhere the climate would never have supported them as far north or against the mountains as I am. As pointed out by others too color is a long ways from being what should be used as any sort of hybrid diagnosis, especially in different genera that have extremely distinct morphological/physiological separations beyond their external patterns and have been separated for millenia; a one-off odd hybrid is not out of question, but likelihood of introgression from there is minimal at best. And trying to compare them against same-genus reproductively flexible creatures with a lot of troublesome things like ring species in them like Ensatinasor other salamanders is really apples to oranges as well. If there were some more solid structural trait that was being pointed out (scales that shouldn't be there, orientations that are way off, someone had skeletal references that point to another genus instead of Lampropeltis, an actual genetic record), I could consider hybrid possibility, but when it's based on a variation of natural countershading, range overlaps (normal for separate genera even if somewhat related), and little else...it's about as supported as finding a rubber boa naturally in Tennessee.
Are there any normal looking Ball Pythons produced in ratio of a hybrid love conection...?

So, check it out. You're saying that where the Milksnakes are, is too far up the mountain for longnose to ever had existed past the ice age... What about below your faded milks? In California, it's known that if you want to find a zonata, you'll have to drive up the mountain to an elevation of 3000-4000 ft. That's right now, present time. Now they did exist much lower at one time. I found (actually an ex-love fling) a DOR at around 1500 ft (more precise, 1700 ft). When I told Brian Hubbs this, he was not surprised. Nor was he surprised when I told him you can still find them in Placerville. However historically, they were found as low or lower than 768 ft, if I remember correctly. That's based on someone telling me they used to find the in Roseville CA. (768 is the elevation of El Dorado Hills). Here's what I propose... the milk mated the rhino, climbed up the hill because it was getting too hot (like what collard lizards are currently doing), mated a milk, they climbed up over the years as high as they could go, mated another milk, and so forth... until now you have longnose DNA in a mountainous habbitat 🥵 = 🐍=🧬=🐍=🧬=🐍=🧬=🐍=🧬=🐍=🧬=🐍=🧬=🐍=🧬=🐍===🔜 🥶
Misquoting to push a point doesn't prove a point...because half of what you're trying to reference (and only as a "here's a thought" rather than with viable evidence) is not what I wrote. Hybrids never happened here, the milks didn't colonize simply by moving from further south, and we're still at the same spot: no viable evidence for the claim while rehashing the same former moot points.

Re: Milk Snakes from the last few years...Dial up warning.

Posted: September 22nd, 2021, 5:41 pm
by Scott Waters
Porter….

The “hybrid gopher-king” spot is known by a lot of people. That spot has been herped heavily for over 40 years, probably longer. Not sure why anyone would say it’s a secret, it’s definitely not. That explains why you’re seeing herping activity.

Re: Milk Snakes from the last few years...Dial up warning.

Posted: September 22nd, 2021, 10:48 pm
by Porter
hcarlton wrote:
September 22nd, 2021, 9:49 am

Misquoting to push a point doesn't prove a point...because half of what you're trying to reference (and only as a "here's a thought" rather than with viable evidence) is not what I wrote. Hybrids never happened here, the milks didn't colonize simply by moving from further south, and we're still at the same spot: no viable evidence for the claim while rehashing the same former moot points.
🤦🏻‍♂️

Re: Milk Snakes from the last few years...Dial up warning.

Posted: September 22nd, 2021, 11:04 pm
by Porter
Scott Waters wrote:
September 22nd, 2021, 5:41 pm
Porter….

The “hybrid gopher-king” spot is known by a lot of people. That spot has been herped heavily for over 40 years, probably longer. Not sure why anyone would say it’s a secret, it’s definitely not. That explains why you’re seeing herping activity.
🤦🏻‍♂️

Re: Milk Snakes from the last few years...Dial up warning.

Posted: September 23rd, 2021, 5:46 am
by Porter
Well there’s no reason for me to keep kicking a dead horse. And I’m sure Chad doesn’t mind Getting some extra attention to his post. But it is about milk snakes, and not hybrids. Lots of great variations here Chad :beer: I like the one from SW Illinois the best. My grandma was from there. That’s where I’m going to get my lifer milk 😎 Someday

I’m gonna go find Jessie‘s girl… She’s got to be around here somewhere 🧐 🔎

Re: Milk Snakes from the last few years...Dial up warning.

Posted: September 24th, 2021, 8:50 am
by Eimon
Thanks for the heads up...........great to join in the "memory lane" festivities here! This truly is an EPIC post! Damn, now I know why Hubbs painted so many curbs in the Mid West :lol: Wait, were there even curbs anywhere back then :?: :shock:

Re: Milk Snakes from the last few years...Dial up warning.

Posted: September 24th, 2021, 8:54 pm
by fringe
Chaddles? You've outdone yourself with this post. Just what the FHF needed. In fact, this actually morphed into a classic FHF thread there for a few minutes. The classic dial-up warning post and dialogue about the actual post, but then...out of left field comes this guy streaking across the field. Nice post bud. You left out one state though.