Canebrake dens?

Dedicated exclusively to field herping.

Moderator: Scott Waters

User avatar
justinm
Posts: 3423
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 5:26 am
Location: Illinois
Contact:

Re: Canebrake dens?

Post by justinm »

Stohlgren,

I don't understand your comment about Illinois being apart of a NW coastal plain? Central Illinois is all plains. Southern Illinois is the foothills of the Smokies. If you've not been there, it's very hilly, not like Central Flat Illinois (plains).
User avatar
MHollanders
Posts: 583
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 2:32 pm
Location: Houston, TX

Re: Canebrake dens?

Post by MHollanders »

VanAR wrote:
Very cool. Are snakes from all regions in AK highly variable or do individual regions tend to hold to a particular appearance?
The timbers I've seen tend towards something like this- most of the Ozark animals are grey or yellow with a red dorsal stripe, though you get some pinkish individuals the farther south/east you go, and the red stripe isn't always present (the post-orbital stripe usually is). Animals in the Ouachitas tend to be more yellow (with a red stripe) though you get some pinkish ones every now and then. The most pink animals I've seen there are in some of the montane areas that are south of the Arkansas river but aren't truly part of the Ouachita mountains- they're technically Ozarks but aren't directly connected. I had an adult male I used in research from that area that was nearly as pink as some of the animals I've seen in Georgia.

I've only seen photos of lowland animals, but they've all been pretty similar to other lowland forms in the southeast, with some being more yellow, some more pink.

Van
Van, good job! Now everyone can find horridus. You should really watch out with localities. ;) :lol:
User avatar
Stohlgren
Posts: 603
Joined: November 6th, 2010, 10:59 am
Location: Athens, GA (Columbia, MO)

Re: Canebrake dens?

Post by Stohlgren »

justinm wrote:Stohlgren,

I don't understand your comment about Illinois being apart of a NW coastal plain? Central Illinois is all plains. Southern Illinois is the foothills of the Smokies. If you've not been there, it's very hilly, not like Central Flat Illinois (plains).
The Coastal Plain physiographic province (the region where "canebrakes" were formerly recognized) covers most of the lowlands of the SE United States, and extends up into SE Missouri and southern Illinois (which is the NW extent of this region). This is why you get Coastal Plain species such as N. cyclopion, F. abacura, Amphiuma and Siren (I realize these species occur in some areas that are not Coastal Plain but the majority of their ranges are within this region), and also why you get cypress swamps there. This region is drastically different from the plains of the midwest you are referring to. And yes, I have been to both southeastern Missouri and Illinois. Also, I would not consider southern Illinois as the foothills of the Smokies. The Smokies are a region of the Appalachian Mountains, which are a considerable distance from southern Illinois.


This map was the best I could find of the Coastal Plain in a ten second google search.
http://www.google.com/imgres?q=gulf+coa ... x=81&ty=37
User avatar
VanAR
Posts: 590
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 8:36 am
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Canebrake dens?

Post by VanAR »

Also, I would not consider southern Illinois as the foothills of the Smokies. The Smokies are a region of the Appalachian Mountains, which are a considerable distance from southern Illinois.
Yeah, the southern Illinois highlands are called the Shawnee Hills. They are the result of sediment deposition from an inland sea that was uplifted around the same time as the Ozark/St. Francis mountain uplift (and the uplifts of the Edwards Plateau and Llano Estecado). All of that as been hypothesized to have occurred roughly as a result of the Appalachian-Ouachita Orogeny (collision and suturing of the North and South American plates), which was the event that produced most of the mountains from the Adirondacks in New York to the Davis and Chisos mountains in Texas/New Mexico.

So... long story short, they aren't part of the smokies (especially since the smokies are folded/faulted instead of an uplift), but they were formed around the same time, due to the same major event.

Van
User avatar
pete
Posts: 745
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 7:11 pm
Location: cape cod ma.

Re: Canebrake dens?

Post by pete »

Despite all this geographic mumbo jumbo :roll: isn;t it true that there is no such thing as a canebrake? :lol: :lol: :lol:
User avatar
justinm
Posts: 3423
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 5:26 am
Location: Illinois
Contact:

Re: Canebrake dens?

Post by justinm »

Van,

Super cool information, thanks for making me understand it better. I guess I misunderstood or assumed that the same event related the areas more closely. I was camped on the banks of the Mississippi during the last earthquake down there. Pretty cool to think that a major fault line is still active down there.
ugh

Re: Canebrake dens?

Post by ugh »

justinm wrote:...... Southern Illinois is the foothills of the Smokies. If you've not been there, it's very hilly, not like Central Flat Illinois (plains).
I thought the 'smokies' were along the TN/NC border.
User avatar
justinm
Posts: 3423
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 5:26 am
Location: Illinois
Contact:

Re: Canebrake dens?

Post by justinm »

Holier than Thou wrote:
justinm wrote:...... Southern Illinois is the foothills of the Smokies. If you've not been there, it's very hilly, not like Central Flat Illinois (plains).
I thought the 'smokies' were along the TN/NC border.

I guess you didn't read what Van wrote and then what I wrote after?
User avatar
Andrew G
Posts: 278
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 1:53 pm
Location: South-Central Kansas

Re: Canebrake dens?

Post by Andrew G »

justinm wrote:How do they den over there? On hillsides with South/SW facing slopes.


I'm not sure how they den. This population was only found last year, and Joe Collins and Travis Taggart thought that it was pretty significant. 5 Timbers were found in this area, this being the first one of the day. I found one other, and some other noteable herpers found the rest. Don't limit your searches to SW facing anything, on any species. You're going to miss out on a lot of opportunities.
Do you know if there are any studies of this population going on? Do you have an estimate of how far away from other populations it was found, and were there any notable woodlands at least fairly close by? It seems strange to think of Kansas timbers out on the Plains, that is an awesome find! :thumb:
Matt Arnold
Posts: 174
Joined: August 14th, 2011, 6:26 pm
Location: North Alabama

Re: Canebrake dens?

Post by Matt Arnold »

justinm wrote: Ugh I agree with some of what you're saying and my point is this. Too many people think they know something, but they don't. I've seen dens facing other than SW, I've seen them shady. One I know is being studied by University of Tenn. is completely covered by canopy and doesn't face South or West, OMG! So to say that there is a subspecies that doesn't exist? I'm calling that horseshit, and I'm sick of hearing it. Everybody wants to be special, or think they have something unique. Truth is with Timbers they're variable, and a lot of people don't know diddly and think they do.
No one is really claiming that they know anything. People are just expressing their opinion and you are expressing yours. Yes, there is no recognized subspecies for horridus anymore and that's fine. But I will call the snakes I think are Canebrakes and the snakes I think are Timbers, Canebrakes/Timbers. Why does that make you so mad? It really doesn't matter, since we all know they are horridus.
User avatar
justinm
Posts: 3423
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 5:26 am
Location: Illinois
Contact:

Re: Canebrake dens?

Post by justinm »

Andrew G wrote:
justinm wrote:How do they den over there? On hillsides with South/SW facing slopes.


I'm not sure how they den. This population was only found last year, and Joe Collins and Travis Taggart thought that it was pretty significant. 5 Timbers were found in this area, this being the first one of the day. I found one other, and some other noteable herpers found the rest. Don't limit your searches to SW facing anything, on any species. You're going to miss out on a lot of opportunities.
Do you know if there are any studies of this population going on? Do you have an estimate of how far away from other populations it was found, and were there any notable woodlands at least fairly close by? It seems strange to think of Kansas timbers out on the Plains, that is an awesome find! :thumb:

Andrew,

If you know Travis or Joe you can ask them. Joe told me he expected some to be found in that county for a long time. I guess it was just the right weather or time to find them. There were some small patches of timber, and hills. I found so many copperheads there that I just moved on hoping to find some kings or milks instead. That female was post partem, if you can't tell so they are breeding there.
dragoncjo
Posts: 385
Joined: June 12th, 2010, 5:32 pm

Re: Canebrake dens?

Post by dragoncjo »

To the original poster see Will L. post, it is the best answer. Timber/Canebrakes don't read textbooks and don't follow the rules. Try to go into the field without any pre-conceived notions and just soak it all in. It annoys some when one acts like an expert on a species when they've seen a few. The more I spend time in the field the more I realize I don't know that much and have plenty to learn, the species continues to amaze me.

JustinM, they just are young snakes right?. In my neck of the woods all young timbers look like that (grey with brown stripe down the back), but don't retain alot of the grey (if any) into adulthood.
User avatar
-EJ
Posts: 1078
Joined: June 10th, 2010, 12:17 pm

Re: Canebrake dens?

Post by -EJ »

The anal retentive have spoken...

Southern Timbers (Canebrakes) and Northern Timbers do seem to be different variations of the same species (a good place for the intended use of subspecies.) I always wondered what the difference was outside of pattern and color but having the opportunity to find both I can see some difference.

As to localities... how do you talk about a population and population differences without mentioning localities. The anal retentive have to realize they are doing more harm in a forum such as this by trying to force the majority to behave as they dictate. Again... if someone wants to find a location... they will. I get a distinct sense of paranoia and control with some folks.

This is me trolling again... I suspect a good number of people have just given up or gone away for being called ignorant... a troll... out and out... stupid... for expressing their ideas that the anal retentive does not agree with.

Could have been an intresting discussion if not for the mud slinging fest.

As to more photos... It seems that when you find a group of Timbers or Canebrakes... similar to many reptiles... you find a great number but outside of that they seem to be rarely encountered. I've hiked many areas in NY and PA that were supposed to be overrun with Timbers... never saw a single one. My experience with the Northern race was in the NJ Pine Barrens where they are supposed to be fairly rare. We found over 15 in 2 days. In one brush pile we found 5 in a cluster.

Go figure.
User avatar
justinm
Posts: 3423
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 5:26 am
Location: Illinois
Contact:

Re: Canebrake dens?

Post by justinm »

EJ,

If studies find that there isn't any difference between the animals living in different habitats, then why should anyone retain that name or cling to a subspecies that never existed. There was recently a post that showed huge variation in color of Strawberry Poison Dart frogs, much more variation than we're seeing in Timbers. I guess each color morph should be it's own subspecies? This is the line of thought that I'm seeing, and it is ignorant. If people who know Timber Rattlesnakes infinitely more intimately than I do don't think there's a reason for a subspecies, then why are people hanging on to it? That's what point I'm trying to make.

It's just funny to me that people will cling to science when it benefits their ideals and shun it when they disagree as if they know more. It's actually shocking, and rubs me wrong.
User avatar
-EJ
Posts: 1078
Joined: June 10th, 2010, 12:17 pm

Re: Canebrake dens?

Post by -EJ »

It would seem that there are behavioral differences between the two and it just might well be the result of the specific habitat they occupy. You do have to ask how a species can occupy so dramaticly different habitats.

I'm not saying they should be different species or subspecies but I am saying there does seem to be a difference between the two animals. Why even tag a common name on the different form of Timber in the first place?

It would almost seem that many would like to call each color morph its own subspecies or even species. An extreme case would be the California Mountain Kingsnake. Wasn't it recently determined that they are all the same species using DNA comparison?

I personally cling to an idea until I see an indisputable reason to change that idea and I really don't like that kind of change to begin with. In the last 20 years there has been so much seemingly haphazard change. This is especially true in taxonomy. There have been many names that have been changed and then reverted back. Why can't they get it correct the first time or accept that the old timers really did now what they were talking about.

It also comes down to the basic question of what is a species and how long does a population have to be isolated before it is considered a seperate species. What I found interesting is that the term 'subspecies' was set up to describe a population that was similar to the species in question but not different enough to be considered a seperate species. It still had the basic definition in that it was geneticly isolated which I find interesting.

Needless to say there is a great situation for the Canebrake to den in the south throughout their range because they share most of the same range as the Gopher tortoise. These tortoises provide huge denning opportunity. It would seem that they don't utilize that opportunity.
justinm wrote:EJ,

If studies find that there isn't any difference between the animals living in different habitats, then why should anyone retain that name or cling to a subspecies that never existed. There was recently a post that showed huge variation in color of Strawberry Poison Dart frogs, much more variation than we're seeing in Timbers. I guess each color morph should be it's own subspecies? This is the line of thought that I'm seeing, and it is ignorant. If people who know Timber Rattlesnakes infinitely more intimately than I do don't think there's a reason for a subspecies, then why are people hanging on to it? That's what point I'm trying to make.

It's just funny to me that people will cling to science when it benefits their ideals and shun it when they disagree as if they know more. It's actually shocking, and rubs me wrong.
User avatar
azatrox
Posts: 793
Joined: June 9th, 2010, 6:51 am
Location: Arizona

Re: Canebrake dens?

Post by azatrox »

Needless to say there is a great situation for the Canebrake to den in the south throughout their range because they share most of the same range as the Gopher tortoise. These tortoises provide huge denning opportunity. It would seem that they don't utilize that opportunity.
Well, if indeed horridus are not denning in Gopherus burrows down south, there's got to be reasons why they don't. I'm no horridus expert by any means, but it would seem to me that if the tortoise burrows presented the ideal denning opportunity, then the snakes would utilize them as such.

My question would be: Why don't they? What is it about the tortoise dens that deters the snakes from overwintering in them? I don't know.

Goes to show that we may think of something as "perfect" for snakes, but for reasons beyond our knowledge they may behave otherwise.

-Kris
User avatar
Stohlgren
Posts: 603
Joined: November 6th, 2010, 10:59 am
Location: Athens, GA (Columbia, MO)

Re: Canebrake dens?

Post by Stohlgren »

azatrox wrote:
Needless to say there is a great situation for the Canebrake to den in the south throughout their range because they share most of the same range as the Gopher tortoise. These tortoises provide huge denning opportunity. It would seem that they don't utilize that opportunity.
Well, if indeed horridus are not denning in Gopherus burrows down south, there's got to be reasons why they don't. I'm no horridus expert by any means, but it would seem to me that if the tortoise burrows presented the ideal denning opportunity, then the snakes would utilize them as such.

My question would be: Why don't they? What is it about the tortoise dens that deters the snakes from overwintering in them? I don't know.

Goes to show that we may think of something as "perfect" for snakes, but for reasons beyond our knowledge they may behave otherwise.

-Kris
Gopher tortoise occur in fire maintained, open canopy pine forest. The burrows are used by hundreds of animals including many snake species (I believe horridus have been documented in them). Eastern indigos and eastern diamondbacks use them commonly so there is nothing that deters snakes in general from using them. In the Coastal Plain, C. horridus typically occur in hardwood riparian areas, where gopher tortoise do not occur. So where the two species are sympatric there is a separation of habitats that are used which likely limits the use of tortoise burrows by horridus for overwintering sites.
User avatar
Knightkrawler5
Posts: 257
Joined: June 8th, 2010, 6:54 pm
Location: Milwaukee, WI

Re: Canebrake dens?

Post by Knightkrawler5 »

yeah I don't really get the "look of the snake" means it is different.... These are a few of my horridus finds this year. I have to back up Justin on this one considering these snakes were all found within 100 yards of each other...

Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image

All in WI by the way
MuayThaipan
Posts: 118
Joined: June 10th, 2010, 6:20 pm
Location: Hazard,Ky

Re: Canebrake dens?

Post by MuayThaipan »

This was posted several years ago I do not agree with all of it but when it comes down to lumpers VS. splitters I am in Favor of splitting these 2 VERY different animals. For one thing I would bet these animals aren't as closely related as many of the other accepted sub-species that are out there. Besides what is a subspecies if not just a regional variant and horridus/atricaudatus are definitely regional variants. My earlier statement speaking about the venom was just one example not my whole argument, hell scutts and helleri have regionally varying venoms, but last I checked (and I do have the source if you want it there are at least 4 distinct varieties of horridus venom. Enjoy the read and lets have a good ole fashion debate.





Crotalus horridus atricaudatus


Chad Minter

License: This article may be freely distributed, placed on your website as a free download, copied and distributed in printed or digital format provided that the document remains unaltered and all links, attributions, statements (including this license) remain intact.

"Is Crotalus horridus atricaudatus a valid subspecies of Crotalus horridus?" To answer this question, one must first define a subspecies.

Merriam Webster Dictionary defines subspecies as:

Main Entry: sub·spe·cies

Pronunciation: 's&b-"spE-shEz, -sEz

Function: noun

Etymology: New Latin

: a subdivision of a species: as a : a category in biological classification that ranks immediately below a species and designates a population of a particular geographical region genetically distinguishable from other such populations of the same species and capable of interbreeding successfully with them where its range overlaps theirs b : a named subdivision (as a race or variety) of a taxonomic species c : SUBGROUP 1

sub·spe·cif·ic /"s&b-spi-'si-fik/ adjective

Criteria

The three criteria for defining a population of animals as a subspecies are:

Is the population of a particular geographic region?

Is the population genetically distinguishable from other such populations?

Is the population capable of interbreeding successfully with them where their ranges overlap? (This serves to establish that they are indeed members of the same species.)

First Test



A geographic range map published by William S. Brown in National Geographic Magazine clearly shows that the Canebrake Rattlesnake, Crotalus horridus atricaudatus, is indigenous to a particular geographic region. 1

This differs from "color morphs" in that the two populations have a distinct range. An example of a "color morph" or "variation" would be Heterodon platyrhinos. The Eastern Hognose Snake has both solid black and patterned variations which occur over the same geographic range. Another example of "color morphs" or "variations" would be "black phase" and "yellow phase" Timber Rattlesnakes, Crotalus horridus, which occur over the same geographic range.

Crotalus horridus atricaudatus clearly passes the first criteria for inclusion as a subspecies.

Second Test

Ginger Clark makes the statement "Northern and southern populations have been recognized as distinct subspecies, but this classification remains controversial. A proposed alternative arrangement recognizes southern, northern, and western morphotypes."2

Clark also makes the statement "Analysis of molecular variance demonstrates that traditional subspecific divisions explain only 3.5% of variation, whereas the alternative geographic classification (southern, northern, and western regions) explains 18.6% of genetic variation."3

This indicates that Crotalus horridus and Crotalus horridus atricaudatus are genetically distinguishable from one another.

Crotalus horridus atricaudatus clearly passes the second criteria for inclusion as a subspecies.

Third test

Crotalus horridus and Crotalus horridus atricaudatus are capable of interbreeding where their ranges overlap.

Crotalus horridus atricaudatus clearly passes the third criteria for inclusion as a subspecies.

Observation

Clark also makes the statement "Hence, the mtDNA data indicate distinct population segments across the range of C. horridus but do not show evolutionary separations that would support subspecific designations."4

Since criteria for inclusion as subspecies do not require a certain amount of "evolutionary separations", only that they be genetically distinguishable, this observation is not relevant to subspecific designations.

Practical considerations

Opinions differ concerning taxonomy. Is there a practical reason for considering C. horridus atricaudatus valid or invalid? The answer is yes.


The live animal trade offers both Northern and Southern subspecies for sale. When breeders, zoos, and private collectors engage in a commercial transaction involving this species it is important that the buyer and seller are both talking about the same type of animal. Quite simply, a buyer would be very upset to expect to purchase a southern *Canebrake rattlesnake* and end up with a *Timber rattlesnake* or vice versa. Breeding programs that are interested in maintaining true genetics of the subspecies would certainly need to differentiate the subspecies.

This weighs heavily in favor of recognizing C. horridus atricaudatus as a valid subspecies.

Conclusion

Crotalus horridus atricaudatus is a population of a particular geographic region, genetically distinguishable from C. horridus, and capable of interbreeding with C. horridus. Crotalus horridus atricaudatus is therefore a valid subspecies.

More scientific data is needed to support the existence or non-existence of a third or fourth subspecies which would include the northwestern and southwestern populations of this species.

A debates forum has been set up at http://www.envenomated.com for feedback to this article.

About the Author

Chad Minter is the Author of Venomous Snakes of the Southeast. Biographical and contact information can be found at http://www.envenomated.com

1.W.S. Brown. "Hidden Life of the Timber Rattlesnake." National Geographic.July (1993):

2.Ginger Clark. "Phylogeography of the Timber Rattlesnake (Crotalus horridus) Based on mtDNA Sequences." Journal of Herpetology 37.1

3.Ginger Clark. "Phylogeography of the Timber Rattlesnake (Crotalus horridus) Based on mtDNA Sequences." Journal of Herpetology 37.1

4.Ginger Clark. "Phylogeography of the Timber Rattlesnake (Crotalus horridus) Based on mtDNA Sequences." Journal of Herpetology 37.1
MuayThaipan
Posts: 118
Joined: June 10th, 2010, 6:20 pm
Location: Hazard,Ky

Re: Canebrake dens?

Post by MuayThaipan »

Little test for the "experts" where do you think these animals came from?
Image
Image
Image
Image
MuayThaipan
Posts: 118
Joined: June 10th, 2010, 6:20 pm
Location: Hazard,Ky

Re: Canebrake dens?

Post by MuayThaipan »

I bet I could post 12 or more snakes that you couldn't tell me if they're from the Midwest, Northeast, or SouthEast. So this makes a case for a subspecies? Brilliant idea.
Try me.
User avatar
-EJ
Posts: 1078
Joined: June 10th, 2010, 12:17 pm

Re: Canebrake dens?

Post by -EJ »

Many Snakes do use Gopher tortoise burrows and Canbrakes probably use them also. Each individual tortoise constructs many burrows but only uses one. I can't think of any references that note the Canbrake as denning in them. It's almost a requirement for the Southern Indigo snake.
azatrox wrote:
Needless to say there is a great situation for the Canebrake to den in the south throughout their range because they share most of the same range as the Gopher tortoise. These tortoises provide huge denning opportunity. It would seem that they don't utilize that opportunity.
Well, if indeed horridus are not denning in Gopherus burrows down south, there's got to be reasons why they don't. I'm no horridus expert by any means, but it would seem to me that if the tortoise burrows presented the ideal denning opportunity, then the snakes would utilize them as such.

My question would be: Why don't they? What is it about the tortoise dens that deters the snakes from overwintering in them? I don't know.

Goes to show that we may think of something as "perfect" for snakes, but for reasons beyond our knowledge they may behave otherwise.

-Kris
User avatar
-EJ
Posts: 1078
Joined: June 10th, 2010, 12:17 pm

Re: Canebrake dens?

Post by -EJ »

The tortoise also occurs in cultivated areas, Gulf hammock/hardwood, coastal dunes among other areas. I'm sure horridus uses the burrows but the question is do they den in the burrows. I'm seeing denning as more than one individual using the same space.

I've seen horridus throughout the coastal plain. From Mississippi to NJ... pinewood forest... I've also found Gopher Tortoise in hardwood riparian areas.
Stohlgren wrote:
Gopher tortoise occur in fire maintained, open canopy pine forest. The burrows are used by hundreds of animals including many snake species (I believe horridus have been documented in them). Eastern indigos and eastern diamondbacks use them commonly so there is nothing that deters snakes in general from using them. In the Coastal Plain, C. horridus typically occur in hardwood riparian areas, where gopher tortoise do not occur. So where the two species are sympatric there is a separation of habitats that are used which likely limits the use of tortoise burrows by horridus for overwintering sites.
User avatar
-EJ
Posts: 1078
Joined: June 10th, 2010, 12:17 pm

Re: Canebrake dens?

Post by -EJ »

I've heard of a few references that suggest that venom composition is a valid means of determining the evolution of a species. I think I either saw it in one of Campbells books or heard it at one of Lamars talks.
Akula wrote:
MuayThaipan wrote:I agree with Terry, these are quite different snakes, I can provide more info if needed but I get the feeling no matter how much I supply, many just wont except it, some people you just cant reach. I recommend taking a bite from a NY animals then healing up and trying it again in N. Fl, If you survive that bite then we'll talk. Personally I'd take an adult EDB bite over a Large N.Fl Canebrake.
Are you seriously using venom composition as a means of cladistics? Really? Something that is as highly variable within populations, heck, even undergoes ontogenetic shifts within individuals?

What about the PA populations with large neurotoxic components to their venom? Do we just ignore that for sake of your argument?
User avatar
-EJ
Posts: 1078
Joined: June 10th, 2010, 12:17 pm

Re: Canebrake dens?

Post by -EJ »

I happen to think Taxacom ( http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom ) is an excellent reference. Any student of taxonomy should subscribe. It consists of some super impressive taxonomists who are more than willing to answer the most trivial questions. These are taxonomists that pretty much wrote the book or are still writing the book as more tools become available. I've been a subscriber for over 10 years and have learned a great deal about the history of current taxonomy (as much as I could understand). This was the list where I innocently(really) asked for a definition of a species and the 'discussion' raged on for a good long time. I never got a definitive answer but I did learn there probably isn't one.

Bryan... I highly suspect there are some personal reasons why you dislike the group. Just curious... are you the one who proposes that varanids are venomous?
venomdoc wrote:I've uploaded two papers
- the oft-mentioned mtDNA paper http://www.venomdoc.com/downloads/Crota ... _mtDNA.pdf which showed that the genetics were very shallow and any structure did not follow established perceptions. Showing how little colour/pattern/mean in regards to taxonomy.
- a paper showing differences in the venom within the range (that still uses the subspecies names but that is to be expected with the taxonomical travesty known as Toxicon, that is a complete embarrassment to the field with the absolute editorial disinterest in proper taxonomical accuracy) http://www.venomdoc.com/downloads/Crota ... _venom.pdf
- as for personal experience, my very first snakebite was actually from a pink 'canebrake' type from the Florida/Georgia border that was searingly neurotoxic with a complete absence of localised effects. I have subsequently heard of other bites from the same area with similar effects. Venom variation within a species is well-documented for many snake species and is of no taxonomical relevance.

Cheers
Bryan

Associate Professor Bryan G Fry
ARC Future Fellow
Venom Evolution Laboratory
School of Biological Sciences
University of Queensland
St. Lucia, Qld
4072 Australia

0400193182

http://www.venomdoc.com
User avatar
-EJ
Posts: 1078
Joined: June 10th, 2010, 12:17 pm

Re: Canebrake dens?

Post by -EJ »

Never happen... the position is filled by a few...

My ignorance never bothered me... it gives me pleasure when the vacancy is filled.

I was going to spell it Canebreak but figured I'd double check with the anal retentive first.
pete wrote:one day i hope to be the smartest guy in the room :oops:

till then, ignance is bliss :lol: :lol: love me them canebreaks!

see!! i even miss spelled canebrake :? i'm hopeless
User avatar
Phil Peak
Posts: 523
Joined: June 20th, 2010, 8:17 am
Location: Kentucky
Contact:

Re: Canebrake dens?

Post by Phil Peak »

Knightkrawler5 wrote:yeah I don't really get the "look of the snake" means it is different.... These are a few of my horridus finds this year. I have to back up Justin on this one considering these snakes were all found within 100 yards of each other...
All in WI by the way
For what its worth, this is to be expected. Most populations of timber rattlesnakes demonstrate a large degree of variation even within the same population. By this I mean you can have animals that are sulfur colored, gray, silver, brown, black, lacking a vertebral stripe, having a prominent vertebral stripe, having a stripe of orange or brown or as mentioned, no stripe at all, having chevron type markings or block shaped blotching all within the same geographic area. Conversely, populations that were (are?) traditionally known as canebrakes are decidedly more uniform in appearance and the differences between individuals is far more subtle.

Phil
User avatar
Gluesenkamp
Posts: 290
Joined: June 8th, 2010, 7:57 am
Location: Texas

Re: Canebrake dens?

Post by Gluesenkamp »

What about velvet tails? Now, THOSE are different, right?
Just tugging chains...
User avatar
-EJ
Posts: 1078
Joined: June 10th, 2010, 12:17 pm

Re: Canebrake dens?

Post by -EJ »

If I was to ask that... it would be called 'trolling'.
Gluesenkamp wrote:What about velvet tails? Now, THOSE are different, right?
Just tugging chains...
User avatar
Stohlgren
Posts: 603
Joined: November 6th, 2010, 10:59 am
Location: Athens, GA (Columbia, MO)

Re: Canebrake dens?

Post by Stohlgren »

-EJ wrote:The tortoise also occurs in cultivated areas, Gulf hammock/hardwood, coastal dunes among other areas. I'm sure horridus uses the burrows but the question is do they den in the burrows. I'm seeing denning as more than one individual using the same space.

I've seen horridus throughout the coastal plain. From Mississippi to NJ... pinewood forest... I've also found Gopher Tortoise in hardwood riparian areas.
Horridus in the Coastal Plain don't den communally because the need is not there. At higher latitudes, where the winters are more harsh, snakes communally den out of necessity. There are few places where snakes can successfully overwinter and therefore the snakes have to congregate at these locations. In the Coastal Plain, the winters are not nearly as harsh and there are ample overwinter sites, such as mammal burrows, stump holes, and even in or under logs. These types of sites may not be suitable at higher latitudes. Because of the availability of suitable sites in the Coastal Plain, snakes don't need to congregate and instead can remain dispersed. If one uses a gopher tortoise burrow to overwinter, there are likely many more burrows for other snakes to use as well. More than one snake may use a particular shelter in the Coastal Plain, but it is likely out of chance rather than need.
User avatar
Bryan Hamilton
Posts: 1234
Joined: June 10th, 2010, 9:49 pm

Re: Canebrake dens?

Post by Bryan Hamilton »

If anyone is interested I wrote a paper on this a few years ago:

Hamilton, B.T., Nowak, E.M., 2009. Relationships between Insolation and Rattlesnake Hibernacula. Western North American Naturalist 69, 319-328.
User avatar
-EJ
Posts: 1078
Joined: June 10th, 2010, 12:17 pm

Re: Canebrake dens?

Post by -EJ »

Is it available as a pdf?
Bryan Hamilton wrote:If anyone is interested I wrote a paper on this a few years ago:

Hamilton, B.T., Nowak, E.M., 2009. Relationships between Insolation and Rattlesnake Hibernacula. Western North American Naturalist 69, 319-328.
User avatar
Bryan Hamilton
Posts: 1234
Joined: June 10th, 2010, 9:49 pm

Re: Canebrake dens?

Post by Bryan Hamilton »

If anyone want a pdf, PM me your e-mail address.
User avatar
pete
Posts: 745
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 7:11 pm
Location: cape cod ma.

Re: Canebrake dens?

Post by pete »

Some good reading in this thread. Always nice to learn :thumb:

EJ... I think you are the first person to ever refer to me as "anal retentive". :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: AWESOME!!
User avatar
-EJ
Posts: 1078
Joined: June 10th, 2010, 12:17 pm

Re: Canebrake dens?

Post by -EJ »

Tell me you are not that egocentric. The title is saved for the special... I'm sorry to say... you are not one of them.
pete wrote:Some good reading in this thread. Always nice to learn :thumb:

EJ... I think you are the first person to ever refer to me as "anal retentive". :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: AWESOME!!
User avatar
vincemartino
Posts: 422
Joined: July 20th, 2010, 5:49 pm
Location: Central MD/Big Sur, CA

Re: Canebrake dens?

Post by vincemartino »

-EJ wrote:The tortoise also occurs in cultivated areas, Gulf hammock/hardwood, coastal dunes among other areas. I'm sure horridus uses the burrows but the question is do they den in the burrows. I'm seeing denning as more than one individual using the same space.

I've seen horridus throughout the coastal plain. From Mississippi to NJ... pinewood forest... I've also found Gopher Tortoise in hardwood riparian areas.
From my understanding, NJ horridus don't hibernate in animal burrows in sandy substrate. They may utilize this habitat for foraging and such but don't they utilize certain trees near bodies of water for hibernacula?

Also, I can't help but think of Copperheads when I read this discussion. I have seen Northern Copperheads utilize high elevation rock outcroppings in Oak/Hickory forest as dens, right along side Timbers. I have also seen them on the DelMarVa peninsula a couple hundred miles away living in Loblolly Pine forest interspersed with Cypress swamp. Sound a little like the difference between upland Timbers and lowland Canebrakes?
Yet no one claims there should be another subspecies of Copperhead because of the separate behaviors.

Behavior, it seems, isn't everything. And neither is color for that matter. We could go on and on looking at various species that have vast color and behavior differences between themselves.
lashinala2
Posts: 93
Joined: June 15th, 2010, 5:23 am
Location: Huntsville, Alabama

Re: Canebrake dens?

Post by lashinala2 »

vincemartino wrote:Behavior, it seems, isn't everything. And neither is color for that matter. We could go on and on looking at various species that have vast color and behavior differences between themselves.
True. We humans are a very good example of this.
jswingchun
Posts: 29
Joined: June 8th, 2010, 5:20 am

Re: Canebrake dens?

Post by jswingchun »

Knightkrawler5 wrote:yeah I don't really get the "look of the snake" means it is different.... These are a few of my horridus finds this year. I have to back up Justin on this one considering these snakes were all found within 100 yards of each other...

Image
All in WI by the way
That is a freakin' amazingly cool looking snake for that part of the country!! I have never seen one remotely like that in Iowa.
User avatar
-EJ
Posts: 1078
Joined: June 10th, 2010, 12:17 pm

Re: Canebrake dens?

Post by -EJ »

It's seriousy ironic that you mention trees near rivers. Pinesnakes use just such a hibernaculum. When they clear cranberry bogs they create 'brush piles'. I wonder if horridus use Pinesnake burrows.
vincemartino wrote:
-EJ wrote:The tortoise also occurs in cultivated areas, Gulf hammock/hardwood, coastal dunes among other areas. I'm sure horridus uses the burrows but the question is do they den in the burrows. I'm seeing denning as more than one individual using the same space.

I've seen horridus throughout the coastal plain. From Mississippi to NJ... pinewood forest... I've also found Gopher Tortoise in hardwood riparian areas.
From my understanding, NJ horridus don't hibernate in animal burrows in sandy substrate. They may utilize this habitat for foraging and such but don't they utilize certain trees near bodies of water for hibernacula?

Also, I can't help but think of Copperheads when I read this discussion. I have seen Northern Copperheads utilize high elevation rock outcroppings in Oak/Hickory forest as dens, right along side Timbers. I have also seen them on the DelMarVa peninsula a couple hundred miles away living in Loblolly Pine forest interspersed with Cypress swamp. Sound a little like the difference between upland Timbers and lowland Canebrakes?
Yet no one claims there should be another subspecies of Copperhead because of the separate behaviors.

Behavior, it seems, isn't everything. And neither is color for that matter. We could go on and on looking at various species that have vast color and behavior differences between themselves.
ugh

Re: Canebrake dens?

Post by ugh »

vincemartino wrote: Also, I can't help but think of Copperheads when I read this discussion. I have seen Northern Copperheads utilize high elevation rock outcroppings in Oak/Hickory forest as dens, right along side Timbers. I have also seen them on the DelMarVa peninsula a couple hundred miles away living in Loblolly Pine forest interspersed with Cypress swamp. Sound a little like the difference between upland Timbers and lowland Canebrakes?
Yet no one claims there should be another subspecies of Copperhead because of the separate behaviors.

Behavior, it seems, isn't everything. And neither is color for that matter. We could go on and on looking at various species that have vast color and behavior differences between themselves.



If you're talking about dorsal pattern when you say 'color', no-it isn't everything, and it may not be much-but it's something. Enough so that it's a significant part of what the current taxonomy of several North American snake families is still based on, inconsistent as that system may be......

Unlike C. horridus, A.contortrix show few if any differences in dorsal pattern at all, let alone consistently-between the montane and coastal populations. For that matter you could say the same about Diadophis,Heterodon,Pituophis,Thamnophis,Storeria,Coluber,Pantherophis,etc...

And no my point is not that attricaudatus should be reinstituted but as I've said before snake taxonomy is so inconsistent I just think of it as a joke.
User avatar
-EJ
Posts: 1078
Joined: June 10th, 2010, 12:17 pm

Re: Canebrake dens?

Post by -EJ »

Go 10 years back. Snake taxonomy was very consistant. Ego... seems to be a driving force. I still like Elaphe... Natrix...
ugh wrote:
vincemartino wrote: Also, I can't help but think of Copperheads when I read this discussion. I have seen Northern Copperheads utilize high elevation rock outcroppings in Oak/Hickory forest as dens, right along side Timbers. I have also seen them on the DelMarVa peninsula a couple hundred miles away living in Loblolly Pine forest interspersed with Cypress swamp. Sound a little like the difference between upland Timbers and lowland Canebrakes?
Yet no one claims there should be another subspecies of Copperhead because of the separate behaviors.

Behavior, it seems, isn't everything. And neither is color for that matter. We could go on and on looking at various species that have vast color and behavior differences between themselves.



If you're talking about dorsal pattern when you say 'color', no-it isn't everything, and it may not be much-but it's something. Enough so that it's a significant part of what the current taxonomy of several North American snake families is still based on, inconsistent as that system may be......

Unlike C. horridus, A.contortrix show few if any differences in dorsal pattern at all, let alone consistently-between the montane and coastal populations. For that matter you could say the same about Diadophis,Heterodon,Pituophis,Thamnophis,Storeria,Coluber,Pantherophis,etc...

And no my point is not that attricaudatus should be reinstituted but as I've said before snake taxonomy is so inconsistent I just think of it as a joke.
User avatar
Akula
Posts: 32
Joined: June 22nd, 2011, 7:48 pm

Re: Canebrake dens?

Post by Akula »

-EJ wrote:Go 10 years back. Snake taxonomy was very consistant. Ego... seems to be a driving force. I still like Elaphe... Natrix...
Consistent? Yeah, the elucidation of true taxonomic relationships being consistently hampered due to the unavailability of cheap genetic tests, analytic software, etc.

The bottom line is that phyllogenetics/cladistics have nothing to do with "egos"--how ever much you wish to believe otherwise. It's pretty simple: morphological traits in such animals as reptiles are incredibly misleading, and are often completely irrelevant in the context of evolutionary book keeping (which is all taxonomy is, right?)

But hey, you can go ahead and continue thinking whatever you want--it's clear your ego here is large enough to take on the biggest names in the field with little to no evidence save gross field observations to offer :)
User avatar
-EJ
Posts: 1078
Joined: June 10th, 2010, 12:17 pm

Re: Canebrake dens?

Post by -EJ »

As I read your post i was thinking... yea... you agree... then you mention that ego has nothing to do with the process... I totally disagree. Ego plays a huge part in the process with many folks. Wow... I'm and aircraft mechanic.... who cares what I think. Are you related to Crote something?
Akula wrote:
-EJ wrote:Go 10 years back. Snake taxonomy was very consistant. Ego... seems to be a driving force. I still like Elaphe... Natrix...
Consistent? Yeah, the elucidation of true taxonomic relationships being consistently hampered due to the unavailability of cheap genetic tests, analytic software, etc.

The bottom line is that phyllogenetics/cladistics have nothing to do with "egos"--how ever much you wish to believe otherwise. It's pretty simple: morphological traits in such animals as reptiles are incredibly misleading, and are often completely irrelevant in the context of evolutionary book keeping (which is all taxonomy is, right?)

But hey, you can go ahead and continue thinking whatever you want--it's clear your ego here is large enough to take on the biggest names in the field with little to no evidence save gross field observations to offer :)
User avatar
Akula
Posts: 32
Joined: June 22nd, 2011, 7:48 pm

Re: Canebrake dens?

Post by Akula »

Have you ever met any of the taxonomists in person? Have you ever seen the raw data needed to compile a dendrogram? I doubt it. That's why I think you're confusing enthusiasm and dedication with "ego"--because it is all too easy to do only looking at the *changes* in taxonomy in the last decade or so...

I, for one, don't see these changes as ego manifest, but as "progress" via the advances of modern science--however inconvenient these changes may be for memorization....

Then again, I don't care about common names, or how "attractive" a population of snake looks. I only care about the evolutionary relationships between these populations. And, isn't that the entire purpose of taxonomy? Cataloging these evolutionary relationships?
User avatar
-EJ
Posts: 1078
Joined: June 10th, 2010, 12:17 pm

Re: Canebrake dens?

Post by -EJ »

Did you notice the post on Taxacom? There was a sequence a few years back that addressed the selling of names. That is you can have a species named after you for a price.

That's an extreme. I've also heard of professors kind of being required to name species to retain their position... this is kind of a black area that is not really spoken about. Then there is the professor that is trying to put checkmarks on the board or adding to the resume.

No... I thought taxonomy was to place a name on an animal or plant to allow communication between scientists.
Akula wrote:Have you ever met any of the taxonomists in person? Have you ever seen the raw data needed to compile a dendrogram? I doubt it. That's why I think you're confusing enthusiasm and dedication with "ego"--because it is all too easy to do only looking at the *changes* in taxonomy in the last decade or so...

I, for one, don't see these changes as ego manifest, but as "progress" via the advances of modern science--however inconvenient these changes may be for memorization....

Then again, I don't care about common names, or how "attractive" a population of snake looks. I only care about the evolutionary relationships between these populations. And, isn't that the entire purpose of taxonomy? Cataloging these evolutionary relationships?
User avatar
Akula
Posts: 32
Joined: June 22nd, 2011, 7:48 pm

Re: Canebrake dens?

Post by Akula »

The purpose of taxonomy is to catalog evolutionary relationships at a glance; It also serves as a systematic method to standardize names and to eliminate all confusion due to differences between common names/regional names/ differences between languages/etc. The binomial system isn't even the only system out there :thumb: You should look up "PhyloCode"

Then again, the entire validity of the "subspecies" clade has been debated from day 1; Even E. O. Wilson pretty much calls it a crutch, and I believe he uses a NA salamander clade as an example?

The bottom line is that--from I remember from the literature-- the greatest genetic difference between horridus populations isn't even along a north-south axis, but an eastern-western one...
User avatar
-EJ
Posts: 1078
Joined: June 10th, 2010, 12:17 pm

Re: Canebrake dens?

Post by -EJ »

I guess the definition has changed since I took biology. It was as I stated... for the purpose of communication. I always understood that was the primary function.

The rest is if you subscribe to cladistics at all.
Akula wrote:The purpose of taxonomy is to catalog evolutionary relationships at a glance; It also serves as a systematic method to standardize names and to eliminate all confusion due to differences between common names/regional names/ differences between languages/etc. The binomial system isn't even the only system out there :thumb: You should look up "PhyloCode"

Then again, the entire validity of the "subspecies" clade has been debated from day 1; Even E. O. Wilson pretty much calls it a crutch, and I believe he uses a NA salamander clade as an example?

The bottom line is that--from I remember from the literature-- the greatest genetic difference between horridus populations isn't even along a north-south axis, but an eastern-western one...
User avatar
Akula
Posts: 32
Joined: June 22nd, 2011, 7:48 pm

Re: Canebrake dens?

Post by Akula »

So what would be the point of having a genus and a species in the binomial name at all? It's so that--at a glance--someone can look at all the species within a genus and know that they are more closely related than species from another genus. And that a genus from one family or subfamily is more closely related to another genus within that same family or subfamily than to any other genus outside of those entities...

(please excuse any mixing of terms--as I'm a chemist, not a biologist, and it's been a while since I've studied or done biological research :/ )
User avatar
-EJ
Posts: 1078
Joined: June 10th, 2010, 12:17 pm

Re: Canebrake dens?

Post by -EJ »

genus and species... works... subspecies muddies the water.
Akula wrote:So what would be the point of having a genus and a species in the binomial name at all? It's so that--at a glance--someone can look at all the species within a genus and know that they are more closely related than species from another genus. And that a genus from one family or subfamily is more closely related to another genus within that same family or subfamily than to any other genus outside of those entities...

(please excuse any mixing of terms--as I'm a chemist, not a biologist, and it's been a while since I've studied or done biological research :/ )
User avatar
vincemartino
Posts: 422
Joined: July 20th, 2010, 5:49 pm
Location: Central MD/Big Sur, CA

Re: Canebrake dens?

Post by vincemartino »

Weren't you arguing FOR subspecies like 2 days ago?
Post Reply